Today's Deltanet Headline: "Unprecedented"
12-04-2015, 10:30 AM
#51
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
How about a picture of a giant inflated rat with Delta pilots looking sharp in our double breasted solar panels picketing in front of "said" rat in front of the terminal on deltanet? If any of you non NYC reps are reading this (my reps know exactly what I expect through many communications I've had w/ them) then take note... I expect a great contract w/ NO concessions of any kind. Or I vote NO and will use my frustration to help blow up the rat.
Tail
Tail
Wouldn't work.
Too many guys don't know where their hat is. So we would look odd. Kind of like a pilot in a double breasted jacket with no hat.
12-04-2015, 11:28 AM
#52
Straight QOL, homie
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
Posts: 4,202
I hate the inflatable rat.
There are plenty of legally viable actions to further our cause without stooping to that level.
FFS, who are we? H&H Bagel workers on strike?
The inflatable rat makes us look like a bunch of low-life thugs. Let's be high-class thugs. Like management.
Unless we can get Robert DeNiro or Joe Pesci to walk the line with us. Then we can be low-life thugs. JMO
There are plenty of legally viable actions to further our cause without stooping to that level.
FFS, who are we? H&H Bagel workers on strike?
The inflatable rat makes us look like a bunch of low-life thugs. Let's be high-class thugs. Like management.
Unless we can get Robert DeNiro or Joe Pesci to walk the line with us. Then we can be low-life thugs. JMO
12-05-2015, 06:04 AM
#53
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,159
That's management's argument. And it's a good one.
However - "Status quo" during Section 6 is a broader concept than just bold-faced violations of the PWA. If that's the only criteria then we are always under status quo.
Section 6 time is unique. The parties are held to a stricter standard. Otherwise why did Congress bother to write that paragraph? We can always grieve contract violations. This is different.
Management clearly departed from their usual practice for the sole purpose of avoiding Section 3B4 of our contract. We know it. They know it. Everybody knows it.
Does it "violate" our contract. No. Does it "circumvent" our contract. Yes.
We just need a judge who will see the forest instead of the trees.
However - "Status quo" during Section 6 is a broader concept than just bold-faced violations of the PWA. If that's the only criteria then we are always under status quo.
Section 6 time is unique. The parties are held to a stricter standard. Otherwise why did Congress bother to write that paragraph? We can always grieve contract violations. This is different.
Management clearly departed from their usual practice for the sole purpose of avoiding Section 3B4 of our contract. We know it. They know it. Everybody knows it.
Does it "violate" our contract. No. Does it "circumvent" our contract. Yes.
We just need a judge who will see the forest instead of the trees.
"Your Honor, the Company has been and continues to avoid contractual obligations to its pilots. Circumventing a possible pay raise for that group is wholly consistent with past practices and courses of conduct.
Might I direct the Board's/court's attention to the JV grievance, the reroute grievance, the removal of A330 crew rest facilities, classifying the return parked airplanes to service as "new" aircraft in order to permit more RJs to enter service, etc...
Therefore, as the Board/court can clearly see, it has been and continues to be 'status quo' for the company to act in such a manner as to avoid contractual obligations."
Last edited by FL370esq; 12-05-2015 at 06:12 AM. Reason: accidental early submission
12-08-2015, 06:59 PM
#55
Where could U B tomorrow?
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 68
What happened to unity and “TA15 failed . . .it’s over” and we need to focus on getting a contract?
Someone’s argument seemed to be based on his incorrect recollection of memory and I added some facts to consider. I didn’t attack him or accuse him of anything. And you just jump on your keyboard and spew. Your constant degradation of your fellow pilots is distasteful and one of the saddest forms of bullying in social media . . . hiding behind an anonymous moniker.
FYI – “Chuck” has been a family name for a lot longer than the whining on I read on this board. I didn’t ask for anyone’s approval when I applied for it . . . and I don’t seek anyone’s approval for using it.
12-09-2015, 09:26 AM
#56
Where could U B tomorrow?
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 68
I'm sorry my reading comprehension must be pretty bad. You are saying yes you believe them being placed well above their competitive set, as you put it, is in the status quo.
Isn't the status quo defined by past practice? If so when has Delta ever given two raises in a year and for a total of over 18% in that year thereby putting the non contract folks well over the competition? A three year jump if your statement about AA is correct.
Isn't the status quo defined by past practice? If so when has Delta ever given two raises in a year and for a total of over 18% in that year thereby putting the non contract folks well over the competition? A three year jump if your statement about AA is correct.
The company evaluates and provides periodic pay increases for non-contract employees on a regular and ongoing basis. Status quo.
BTW, I wrote “puts them above AMR end rates.” I did not state “them being placed well above their competitive set”. My focus is on the end rates and the timeline. Here are the numbers (Delta FAs TOS pay rate $61.28 on Dec 1, 2015):
American
TOS Hourly Flight Pay Rate
TOS Hourly Flight Pay Rate
% Yearly Negotiated Increase
1/1/2015
$55.58
1/1/2016
$56.69
2%
1/1/2017
$57.82
2%
1/1/2018
$58.98
2%
1/1/2019
$60.75
3%
Since the percentage increases over the past six years have varied (2011 was zero), it could be argued that status quo is satisfied there, as well.
Actually, your reading comprehension is better than most, in my opinion. Recognizing that there are different opinions in a discussion shows that.
The argument stated in this thread is about status quo between the company and the pilots, not the company and any/everybody else.
I think a more important question here is not about status quo, but rather what would be the justification for the company to potentially stave off any non-contract pay rate increases for three years?
I am turning my attention to Christmas shopping, so I’ll toss in my opinion and head for the mall – mediation takes time (reminder: absent an agreement by March 31, 2016 the parties agree to jointly petition the NMB for mediation services) and the company just bought some breathing room to deal with the pilots . . . as long as it may take.
Merry Christmas . . . happy shopping . . .
And sorry about the format . . . I can't fix the table, but I think you can decipher it.
12-09-2015, 09:38 AM
#57
Straight QOL, homie
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
Posts: 4,202
As to your fear tactic above...no one is buying it. The company is panicking. We will not. We'll take as long as necessary to improve our PWA without concessions.
Last edited by Purple Drank; 12-09-2015 at 09:54 AM.
12-09-2015, 10:03 AM
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Posts: 106
I am turning my attention to Christmas shopping, so I’ll toss in my opinion and head for the mall – mediation takes time (reminder: absent an agreement by March 31, 2016 the parties agree to jointly petition the NMB for mediation services) and the company just bought some breathing room to deal with the pilots . . . as long as it may take.
They can take ALL the time they want.
12-09-2015, 10:13 AM
#59
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 360
The argument stated in this thread is about status quo between the company and the pilots, not the company and any/everybody else.
When the application of a section of the contract (3.B.4.) is dependent on the company's dealings with another employee group (non-cons), then the status quo between the company and all other employees is absolutely pertinent to the conversation.
I think a more important question here is not about status quo, but rather what would be the justification for the company to potentially stave off any non-contract pay rate increases for three years?
Very good question. It's not a stretch, and in fact pretty likely to a reasonable person, that the "justification" or reason for the company's action is to circumvent a clause in the contract. Staving off non-con pay raises for 3 years of record profitability might be seen as a violation of status quo.
I am turning my attention to Christmas shopping, so I’ll toss in my opinion and head for the mall – mediation takes time (reminder: absent an agreement by March 31, 2016 the parties agree to jointly petition the NMB for mediation services) and the company just bought some breathing room to deal with the pilots . . . as long as it may take.
Merry Christmas . . . happy shopping . . .
decipher it.
Merry Christmas.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
