Negotiation Rumors
10-03-2016, 04:00 PM
#121
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2011
Position: Cockpit speaker volume knob set to eleven.
Posts: 1,410
Does this help?
Dear Fellow Pilot,
This afternoon, the Delta MEC Negotiating Committee successfully reached a tentative agreement (TA) with Delta Air Lines.
This agreement represents the culmination of tremendous effort on your behalf. We have been engaged in negotiation preparation and execution for a full year, with incredible dedication from our negotiators, professional staff, subject matter experts and your elected representatives.
As a function of process within the Delta MEC Policy Manual, your elected representatives will now have TA language in their possession for seven days. We will meet, and if they approve the agreement, it will be made available to the Delta pilots for membership ratification.
I understand the desire by many to seek details of the agreement in advance, but I ask that you allow your elected leadership the ability to fully study and understand the agreement. It’s a critical step in this time-honored process of Section 6 negotiations. And if they approve this agreement, you will receive full details and language prior to voting. This will also come in the form of Negotiator Notepads, roadshows and webinars. Your elected local council representatives and Pilot-to-Pilot volunteers will be in pilot lounges to answer questions, and provide information to each of you personally. In short, you will have all the facts prior to casting your vote.
If the MEC approves the tentative agreement, it is incumbent on you to take the time needed to evaluate the agreement in its entirety. It is also important that every one of you take the time to vote. It is your responsibility to your profession and your families to participate in our process.
Fraternally,
Captain Mike Donatelli
Delta MEC Chairman
June 4, 2015
Dear Fellow Pilot,
This afternoon, the Delta MEC Negotiating Committee successfully reached a tentative agreement (TA) with Delta Air Lines.
This agreement represents the culmination of tremendous effort on your behalf. We have been engaged in negotiation preparation and execution for a full year, with incredible dedication from our negotiators, professional staff, subject matter experts and your elected representatives.
As a function of process within the Delta MEC Policy Manual, your elected representatives will now have TA language in their possession for seven days. We will meet, and if they approve the agreement, it will be made available to the Delta pilots for membership ratification.
I understand the desire by many to seek details of the agreement in advance, but I ask that you allow your elected leadership the ability to fully study and understand the agreement. It’s a critical step in this time-honored process of Section 6 negotiations. And if they approve this agreement, you will receive full details and language prior to voting. This will also come in the form of Negotiator Notepads, roadshows and webinars. Your elected local council representatives and Pilot-to-Pilot volunteers will be in pilot lounges to answer questions, and provide information to each of you personally. In short, you will have all the facts prior to casting your vote.
If the MEC approves the tentative agreement, it is incumbent on you to take the time needed to evaluate the agreement in its entirety. It is also important that every one of you take the time to vote. It is your responsibility to your profession and your families to participate in our process.
Fraternally,
Captain Mike Donatelli
Delta MEC Chairman
I've not seen any other wording for this one other than Agreement in principal. Also not seeing anything in the above or our current AIP that says we will be voting (if it comes to that) on something without the final language.
10-03-2016, 04:14 PM
#122
On Reserve
Joined APC: Oct 2016
Posts: 12
No disagreement here.
I have never seen the phrase "A.I.P." used at Delta at any other time in my career. This is new for all of us.
The issue is not whether we will have final language prior to a ratification vote. The issue is the fact that the NC should have never agreed to any TA, AIP, or whatever else you want to call it without having final language in place. This is simply unsat.
Not that having final contract language is a sure-fire solution, since the ALPA professionals are highly skilled at drafting weak language that the company drives a Mack truck through.
The PTIX "loophole" the company found is an excellent example in the "we didn't think they'd do that" department.
Or the lump sum JV settlement. Who the hell would agree to a settlement that didn't address this important issue (whether or not PS would be paid on the settlement monies)? Donatelli and Phinney. That's who. Geniuses.
Not that having final contract language is a sure-fire solution, since the ALPA professionals are highly skilled at drafting weak language that the company drives a Mack truck through.
The PTIX "loophole" the company found is an excellent example in the "we didn't think they'd do that" department.
Or the lump sum JV settlement. Who the hell would agree to a settlement that didn't address this important issue (whether or not PS would be paid on the settlement monies)? Donatelli and Phinney. That's who. Geniuses.
10-03-2016, 04:21 PM
#123
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2011
Position: Cockpit speaker volume knob set to eleven.
Posts: 1,410
No disagreement here.
I have never seen the phrase "A.I.P." used at Delta at any other time in my career. This is new for all of us.
The issue is not whether we will have final language prior to a ratification vote. The issue is the fact that the NC should have never agreed to any TA, AIP, or whatever else you want to call it without having final language in place. This is simply unsat.
Not that having final contract language is a sure-fire solution, since the ALPA professionals are highly skilled at drafting weak language that the company drives a Mack truck through.
The PTIX "loophole" the company found is an excellent example in the "we didn't think they'd do that" department.
Or the lump sum JV settlement. Who the hell would agree to a settlement that didn't address this important issue (whether or not PS would be paid on the settlement monies)? Donatelli and Phinney. That's who. Geniuses.
I have never seen the phrase "A.I.P." used at Delta at any other time in my career. This is new for all of us.
The issue is not whether we will have final language prior to a ratification vote. The issue is the fact that the NC should have never agreed to any TA, AIP, or whatever else you want to call it without having final language in place. This is simply unsat.
Not that having final contract language is a sure-fire solution, since the ALPA professionals are highly skilled at drafting weak language that the company drives a Mack truck through.
The PTIX "loophole" the company found is an excellent example in the "we didn't think they'd do that" department.
Or the lump sum JV settlement. Who the hell would agree to a settlement that didn't address this important issue (whether or not PS would be paid on the settlement monies)? Donatelli and Phinney. That's who. Geniuses.
10-03-2016, 05:14 PM
#124
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2014
Posts: 26
If you saw this potential problem at indoc, you would of course bid the 73N or 717 if available. But even if you got a Maddog or 320, you could bid any aircraft at LAX after 1 year as it breaks the new seat lock. Just don’t bid the 7ER at indoc if you can't stomach potentially waiting 2 years to get to LAX (in this example).
My only point was the new seat lock does not seem like that big of an issue if you bid smartly at indoc.
10-03-2016, 05:37 PM
#125
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2016
Position: Here and there
Posts: 1,906
The example given above was that currently a new hire getting the 7ER NY can bid the 717 LAX after 1 year to get to LAX. With the TA, they won't be able to get to LAX for 2 years, unless a LAX 7ER spot opens.
If you saw this potential problem at indoc, you would of course bid the 73N or 717 if available. But even if you got a Maddog or 320, you could bid any aircraft at LAX after 1 year as it breaks the new seat lock. Just don’t bid the 7ER at indoc if you can't stomach potentially waiting 2 years to get to LAX (in this example).
My only point was the new seat lock does not seem like that big of an issue if you bid smartly at indoc.
If you saw this potential problem at indoc, you would of course bid the 73N or 717 if available. But even if you got a Maddog or 320, you could bid any aircraft at LAX after 1 year as it breaks the new seat lock. Just don’t bid the 7ER at indoc if you can't stomach potentially waiting 2 years to get to LAX (in this example).
My only point was the new seat lock does not seem like that big of an issue if you bid smartly at indoc.
"The freeze for a new hire pilot will be lengthened from 12 months to 24 months, with an exception for a pilot who must bid a new aircraft in order to change bases"
Reading it at face value tells me that if you were to bid NYC ER during indoc but wanted LAX 73N, bidding the latter after year 1 would be allowed because you can't hold LAX ER but can hold LAX 73N. To me that would not incur the 2 year new hire seat lock.
...or am I not interpreting that right?
10-04-2016, 07:43 AM
#128
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,653
The example given above was that currently a new hire getting the 7ER NY can bid the 717 LAX after 1 year to get to LAX. With the TA, they won't be able to get to LAX for 2 years, unless a LAX 7ER spot opens.
If you saw this potential problem at indoc, you would of course bid the 73N or 717 if available. But even if you got a Maddog or 320, you could bid any aircraft at LAX after 1 year as it breaks the new seat lock. Just don’t bid the 7ER at indoc if you can't stomach potentially waiting 2 years to get to LAX (in this example).
My only point was the new seat lock does not seem like that big of an issue if you bid smartly at indoc.
If you saw this potential problem at indoc, you would of course bid the 73N or 717 if available. But even if you got a Maddog or 320, you could bid any aircraft at LAX after 1 year as it breaks the new seat lock. Just don’t bid the 7ER at indoc if you can't stomach potentially waiting 2 years to get to LAX (in this example).
My only point was the new seat lock does not seem like that big of an issue if you bid smartly at indoc.
10-04-2016, 08:14 AM
#129
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Posts: 217
TA1 had the A350 at 747/777 rates, the A330-900 unlisted but I assume with the regular A330, and the A321 with the 739. Nothing for the C-series.
10-04-2016, 09:58 AM
#130
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2016
Position: Moving left
Posts: 153
That's not how the AIP reads. I hope the language on the actual TA reads that way. dALPA has a reputation for putting weak language in the contract and then failing to fight the company when they interpret it differently than we do.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
