Originally Posted by bigbusdriver

Forgot the Delta Dot already? We were first and UAL used the dot (777) to set the bar higher then USAirways set the highest pay of all $330 for the 330. If we are going to play hindsight then lets look at everything you said here. History stands a chance to repeat itself based on what you wrote. Delta had billion dollar earnings in 1999 and 2000. That's only two years in a row. Delta just made similar money in 2010 and 2011, but it's only two years in a row. You said our contract started to chip away at the earnings and then we all know the downward spiral continued. You then go on to say that the give backs were okay because they were communicated properly? What I now see is the same situation ten years later. We are asking for the lion's share of the earnings while not providing the company with a way to get out if something goes bad. Do we bleed the company dry at the first sign of profits or do we work to ensure they continue to make profits and we make money with them? Remember we did not give back anything from C2K for three full years after 9/11. We then arranged to keep furloughed pilots on the street longer while allowing some of the 2500 Captains to stay and earn more money. I agree that hindsight can be used here and it doesn't look good to a furloughed pilot at this point. PBS was implemented in LOA #46 requiring even less pilots.

If pilots can sit on this board and snipe at any MEC Chairman for what they did, then this guy is just as open to being talked about. He is responsible because he was in charge. I voted no, but it didn't matter. The yes voters won and the company still went bankrupt. We are still trying to recover from LOA #46. Look at the recent LOA that got rid of FO OE recovery flying. It took us seven years to get back one LOA #46 item. I would have held the line to bankruptcy court and done battle there, but that too is hindsight. As is the steady progression we have made since LOA #46. LOA #46 was the reset of the baseline, not bankruptcy court. We got billions back in bankruptcy. Billions we gave up under bad times but not under duress like bankruptcy court.

The mission now is to discuss whether we repeat history. I remember him getting upset about using DALPA because he thought it appeared like we were separate from ALPA and he didn't want that. Now he does want to be separate. There's more to this story than meets the eye. Do we break the bank or do we meet half way? You tell me because, it has all happened before and it will all happen again. Now about that USAirways "highest paid in the industry" $330 per hour on the A330. How's that working out?

Originally Posted by Wasatch Phantom

Bar,

I think it's fair to say each of us has our own definitions of what is an acceptable, versus an unacceptable, TA.

I also think it's also fair to say many Delta pilots are very concerned about DALPA's communications (more correctly the lack of communications).

Several forum members have argued persuasively for DALPA to communicate their contract objectives, such as restoration of payrates, reigning in the Alaska codeshare (abuse), improvements to scope, etc, etc. But there hasn't been a defining mission statement at all.

Perhaps this isn't fair, but my opinion is their communications seem to be about managing pilot's expectations (lower).

Again this is historical, but the spectrum has typically been defined by the company at one end, with DALPA at the other end. The pilots in general would be somewhere in between.

However just like an inverted yield curve, it seems we have an "inverted spectrum" with the company at one end, the Delta pilots at the other end, with DALPA in between.

I honestly don't know if DPA could negotiate a better contract than DALPA. I am concerned about setting low goals and I'm very troubled by DALPA's processes. ACL and others frequently post about "change from within". If there has been any change, it is at an unacceptably slow pace.

I do believe that DPA would do a better job of communicating with Delta pilots. I also believe their mission would be to further the interests of the Delta pilots, and only the Delta pilots, without the conflicts of interests (potential or otherwise) at ALPA National.

Further, while the ALPA supporters tout the resources at ALPA National that are available to us, I am very underwhelmed by their performance. Our contractual language has left several loopholes that the company has exploited. If ALPA National's attorneys are so wonderful, why do these loopholes exist? Yes they can be closed, but we will spend negotiating capital fixing the mistakes created by ALPA National's attorneys. Quite simply that's unacceptable by any standard.

So when DALPA supporters say "Trust us, we know what's best..." I, like many others, am very skeptical.

I'm approching my mid-fifties. I can't afford (another) mediocre contract.

Originally Posted by Rather B Fishin

Just to play devil's advocate. What if the contract survey didn't point to "restoration"? You, Carl and even myself may "want" certain things that the pilot group isn't able to produce. We've hitched onto the collective engagement strategy for better or worse. I'm willing (naive/ignorant/hopeful/trustful) enough to see it play through before sending up the balloon.

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp

DALPA showing the pilot group what they proposed in the opener HAS to happen though.

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar

ALPA is against management negotiating in public. ALPA discourages management trying to flank ALPA's negotiators. Making our opener public would be inviting a response. Further, can't you see the headlines now "Delta pilots greed threatens to bankrupt Delta again" ... "Despite bankruptcy at American, Delta's pilots demand wages that are 50% higher" and blah blah blah. The press is not going to come running to the side of anyone earning over $100K a year and of course they'll take max 777 Captain pay for their comparisons.

It just isn't a good idea. Folks lock in on "supposals" and tend to misunderstand the process of negotiation. We don't need 12,000 guys negotiating our contract. We need 12,000 pilots with steadfast resolve saying ... "ALPA speaks for us."

Originally Posted by Wasatch Phantom

I didn't forget the "Delta Dot", but omitted its discussion for brevity. I also didn't bring up the so called "Bankruptcy Protection Letter" for the same reason.

Ideally I would like a cooperative atmosphere between the company and the union representing Delta pilots that's based in large part upon trust and mutual respect. When times are good. and the company is making record profits, we participate (in a big way) and when times are tough we don't. Unfortunately, I don't see that trust and mutual respect coming from Delta. I see that Delta pilots are working very hard to help the company on a daily basis. I also see a merger that is probably the definition of a successful airline merger (and there are precious few of those) due again in large part to the contributions of the Delta pilot group.

My perception is the company is making record profits (despite a very tough economy). In no small part the reason they are making that money is we (Delta pilots) are still working under work rules and (slightly improved) payrates "negotiated" in bankruptcy.

I do not accept that letter 46 lowered the baseline for Delta pilots in perpetuity. That hugely concessionary agreement was intended to keep Delta out of bankruptcy. I think the majority of Delta pilots felt the concessions would be gone in the next section six negotiations.

As far as the PERPs: I think DALPA and Delta came up with a lousy solution, but I also think it was probably the best solution available to them.

We had guys literally faxxing their retirement papers in minutes before midnight on the last day of the month. These were by definition senior pilots who were Captains on widebody (premium and otherwise) aircraft.

Delta literally couldn't train their replacements fast enough as those same replacements often retired while still in training! If DALPA had said "tough toenails" the company would have been forced to park a large percentage of the widebodies, and suffer a huge loss in revenue.

Were furloughed pilots kept on the street longer than necessary? Probably. But I honestly don't know of a better solution.

Originally Posted by DAWGS

I had opportunity to get to know JM many years ago. He is a top notch individual. I must say I don't understand the vitriol for a man who negotiated the highest paying contract in airline history for our group.

Originally Posted by DAWGS

Whomever he supports has no bearing on his accomplishments (alpa/dpa). I wish we had more like him now working for us. My own personal feelings are he was shown the door once he wasn't willing to give anymore. Gave-indeed he did. I feel I would have done the same with the knowledge at the time. Those are tough decisions when your company is at stake.

When our company was making billions, JM got the job done. And yes others deserve credit too. I do know through our conversations, he was very level headed and felt the pilots deserved their rightful due. Today's ALPA leaders haven't even defined rightful due for our group. He produced big in good times. Can the current ALPA do the same? When we are making over 1B a year, that's good times!

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar

Good, excellent even, post. But, what happens next? If ALPA gets what you consider a "lame TA" and gets booted, what then?

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar