80ktsClamp

Oberon-

You're a noob (nothing wrong with that... we've all been there), and if you've been paying attention and know the contract history you'd have some valid input. Yet you've openly admitted that you don't know nor understand what has been going on with our contracts and negotiations all while preaching like you know it all. Then on top of that, you say you don't even know who your reps are. Really?

Might want to tone it down a bit. Your credibility is absolutely shot at this point. A little more listening and a lot less know-it-all preaching is in order.

Spudhauler

Yeah, this place is well known for listening and not being preachy. I do like the irony, though.

Flamer

You might want to take a look at the contract before you espouse the best ways to make it better. And, since you are working under it now. Objectives of pilots are always specific, that is what makes them measure able. Not sure where you came from before DAL, but something is suspect here.

76drvr

Wow! Tool of the day arrogance right there.

ShyGuy

You must be GGTA to want less training for more money (vacation) instead. Who needs recurrent training anyway? IMO training should never be compromised for a personal gain.

index

Really? He's right about this. I'd say you are more deserving for T.O.T.D. for your analysis.

Wingnutdal

Well, you are a tool, so what does that do for your credibility?

Wingnutdal

I am sure you will remember this advice the next time your friend starts talking about rocking chairs and things that "we" have done.

Makin Waves

Does anyone know where I can get a look at the C2015 proposal?

Thanks...

Oberon

I'm learning the contract. I read here which actually has a bit of good information from time-to-time. I ask questions to the guys I fly with and my mentor. I had one question about the multipurpose bank that required an email exchange with the contract committee who was super helpful. I'm certainly no expert and don't claim to be.

I don't think I need to be an expert on the contract to opine that saying "restoration" isn't a useful tactic, strategy, or whatever those espousing it choose to call it. I have been through a section 6 negotiation recently and frequently spoke with the negotiators and reps. The name of the game is maintaining an appearance of negotiating in good faith. If you are too rigid the mediator will take the other side. There were several time at my last company when the company tried to stonewall and the mediator called them on it. It was a different situation at a different company but the RLA covers everyone and the mediator is going to drive the process. Rallying the troupes with "restoration" sounds great, it really does, but right now it does nothing to improve our contract. That said, I could see using rhetoric to rally the pilots down the line if the company is stalling and the MEC wants a strike vote. That's a different situation than "setting restoration as an objective".

For what it's worth, I don't think setting an objective is a bad thing. Certainly the negotiators will set an objective and draw up a strategy that determines what the opener will be. Hopefully they'll do that after tabulating the survey, attending road shows, and doing due diligence on the negotiating environment. I'd also like to be kept in the loop on the progress of negotiations so I can plan accordingly.