Delta Pilots Association
02-09-2012, 03:58 PM
#7441
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,049
Forgot:
Thanks for finding a source. Ken Cooksey was my MEC Chairman and Dan Ford was a Safety guy. They were both true, blue, unionists. Their preference was that ALPA push for mergers to restore Delta flying to Delta. If Delta would not do Delta flying, then they thought the Delta MEC should keep its hands off the flying they did not want to perform and that they (ASA & Comair) should be able to get their own scope which bound Delta.
Scope of course is the first part of securing higher pay. Higher pay at the regionals should have reduced management's incentive to outsource.
That is why there really a commonality of interest between mainline and regional. To build our house we need them to hold up their end of the foundation. To do so, they need scope.
The real battle was with the "outsourcing is good" contingent. Their model is predicated on the lowest cost feed (a phrase heard again yesterday coming from a Delta MEC member). In order to justify their divisions within our union lawyers serving their interest came up with the logic that indirectly screwed the TWA guys merger and which screws our attempts to restrain outsourcing today.
.........
To any DPA supporter, or leader:
Tell us what you are for. What is your vision for Section 1 and why?
Rather than hearing what you are against, I'd like your thoughts on what you are for!
Thanks for finding a source. Ken Cooksey was my MEC Chairman and Dan Ford was a Safety guy. They were both true, blue, unionists. Their preference was that ALPA push for mergers to restore Delta flying to Delta. If Delta would not do Delta flying, then they thought the Delta MEC should keep its hands off the flying they did not want to perform and that they (ASA & Comair) should be able to get their own scope which bound Delta.
Scope of course is the first part of securing higher pay. Higher pay at the regionals should have reduced management's incentive to outsource.
That is why there really a commonality of interest between mainline and regional. To build our house we need them to hold up their end of the foundation. To do so, they need scope.
The real battle was with the "outsourcing is good" contingent. Their model is predicated on the lowest cost feed (a phrase heard again yesterday coming from a Delta MEC member). In order to justify their divisions within our union lawyers serving their interest came up with the logic that indirectly screwed the TWA guys merger and which screws our attempts to restrain outsourcing today.
.........
To any DPA supporter, or leader:
Tell us what you are for. What is your vision for Section 1 and why?
Rather than hearing what you are against, I'd like your thoughts on what you are for!
02-09-2012, 04:15 PM
#7442
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,049
Bar;
You say the DPA is trying to chase the USAPA off a cliff - how? USAPA is 1/2 of a fractured group. I want no part of that, but I dont see it the same way you do.
You talk about unity - I don't see it in ALPA - I see a seat at the table due to collectivism, but no unity.
You say the DPA is trying to chase the USAPA off a cliff - how? USAPA is 1/2 of a fractured group. I want no part of that, but I dont see it the same way you do.
You talk about unity - I don't see it in ALPA - I see a seat at the table due to collectivism, but no unity.
The DPA would take us to nearly an identical position as the US Air guys are in. They lack credibility, they lack consensus, they lack the ability to get a contract done. To put objective criteria behind my subjective summary, the NMB will do business with the party that they think can deliver a contract that keeps interstate commerce flowing. The NMB will park any party it deems unreasonable and has thus parked the US Air pilots. It is political. ALPA has the political muscle & credibility in those circles. Although I am not a Lee Moak fan, he's really been pumping political iron in DC since he got there and we've been a big reason why Crewpass / Known Crew Member, FTDT and the recent FAA authorization are what they are. We are effective lobbyists.
I agree that ALPA does a very poor job of unifying pilots. IMHO the DPA is a direct result of ALPA's loss of direction. However, I understand the tool and the leverage it provides. Real unity is structural. Meaning perfect scope ... meaning management has no choice but to use our labor.
We can best achieve that goal though our association with other pilots. Perhaps it is more imperative than ever that we build bridges and use our collective leverage to stop outsourcing to companies like GoJets. ALPA is simply the best tool, with the greatest leverage, to restore our profession.
02-09-2012, 04:22 PM
#7443
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Carl
02-09-2012, 04:36 PM
#7444
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
SWAPA scope. Period. The strategy to achieve it is to end negotiations by accepting nothing less than the SWAPA contract in it's entirety. It would have the added benefits of achieving close to C2K pay restoration, much better duty rigs, much better health care, etc. It's also a strategy that would make it extremely difficult for the NMB to refuse.
Carl
Carl
I agree completely with Carl on this. It has the added benefit of being a defensible position.
02-09-2012, 04:39 PM
#7445
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
02-09-2012, 04:42 PM
#7446
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,049
SWAPA scope. Period. The strategy to achieve it is to end negotiations by accepting nothing less than the SWAPA contract in it's entirety. It would have the added benefits of achieving close to C2K pay restoration, much better duty rigs, much better health care, etc. It's also a strategy that would make it extremely difficult for the NMB to refuse.
Carl
Carl
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 02-09-2012 at 09:48 PM.
02-09-2012, 05:29 PM
#7447
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: right for a long, long time
Posts: 2,642
That is true. But what if ALPA also made that assertion to its members? And what if ALPA did so for the express purpose of garnering the favor of SWAPA so that SWAPA would join ALPA someday? Sound familiar?
If there is evidence of this, there will be yet another DFR suit against ALPA. If there's no evidence, then there won't.
Carl
If there is evidence of this, there will be yet another DFR suit against ALPA. If there's no evidence, then there won't.
Carl
02-09-2012, 05:36 PM
#7448
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
For some reason, your last post wouldn't quote.
However, to semi-respond to it, I would like to say that this is the very reson I would ask folks on the L&G to post their contract survey essay answers. So we could help each other fine tune where we stand.
I am not for a seniority list revist in any way shape or form. I am for absolute UNITY. In most ways, you and I have agreed on the DCI merger possibilities and the near-impossibility of that now...Without SWA scope.
I am for scope recapture - Complete recapture. Alaska scares the bejesus out of me. RAH? nuff said. DALPA's actions prove to me they have no interest in recapturing scope and instead that they will continue down the road to dilution.
I am not completely against the international joint ventures, I am disappointed with the 3 year look back change. In some tangible ways, AF/KLM has been and is good for the DAL pilots.
Some of you new guys have stagnated and been drug along the bottom of the ocean during your tenure at DAL. It is no different in the mid seniority either, we are just on better paying equipment. I have said it before - I made more at DAL in years 3, 4 and 5 than I have in the past several years. Payrates are important, but stagnation/ backward movement is the real battle.
In broad terms, I dont have to worry about being furloughed. I am thankful for the job I have and I enjoy doing it. I miss several of the elements of the job on lower paying equipment - better trips / layovers, but I am ok with suffering in silence. (T save your longevity arguement (smiley)). I really miss Europe and India. I dont miss narrowbody domestic at all - you won't see me there anytime soon.
If my wife was on board with it, I'd be already gone to a foreign carrier. I like the expat life (lived overseas for 9 years before I got married). I have said it previously, DALPA is going to get their shot at the C2012, not DPA. I honestly hope they hit a homerun. I am sadly not convinced that will be the case.
As to your statement about USAPA - as a bystander (me) that has watched that trainwreck - I disagree with your assertion that they couldn't get a contract and that the NMB wouldn't listen to them. If they accepted Nicalau, they'd have a contract. Their goal was to not accept Nicalau.
However, to semi-respond to it, I would like to say that this is the very reson I would ask folks on the L&G to post their contract survey essay answers. So we could help each other fine tune where we stand.
I am not for a seniority list revist in any way shape or form. I am for absolute UNITY. In most ways, you and I have agreed on the DCI merger possibilities and the near-impossibility of that now...Without SWA scope.
I am for scope recapture - Complete recapture. Alaska scares the bejesus out of me. RAH? nuff said. DALPA's actions prove to me they have no interest in recapturing scope and instead that they will continue down the road to dilution.
I am not completely against the international joint ventures, I am disappointed with the 3 year look back change. In some tangible ways, AF/KLM has been and is good for the DAL pilots.
Some of you new guys have stagnated and been drug along the bottom of the ocean during your tenure at DAL. It is no different in the mid seniority either, we are just on better paying equipment. I have said it before - I made more at DAL in years 3, 4 and 5 than I have in the past several years. Payrates are important, but stagnation/ backward movement is the real battle.
In broad terms, I dont have to worry about being furloughed. I am thankful for the job I have and I enjoy doing it. I miss several of the elements of the job on lower paying equipment - better trips / layovers, but I am ok with suffering in silence. (T save your longevity arguement (smiley)). I really miss Europe and India. I dont miss narrowbody domestic at all - you won't see me there anytime soon.
If my wife was on board with it, I'd be already gone to a foreign carrier. I like the expat life (lived overseas for 9 years before I got married). I have said it previously, DALPA is going to get their shot at the C2012, not DPA. I honestly hope they hit a homerun. I am sadly not convinced that will be the case.
As to your statement about USAPA - as a bystander (me) that has watched that trainwreck - I disagree with your assertion that they couldn't get a contract and that the NMB wouldn't listen to them. If they accepted Nicalau, they'd have a contract. Their goal was to not accept Nicalau.
02-10-2012, 06:39 AM
#7449
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Forgot:
Thanks for finding a source. Ken Cooksey was my MEC Chairman and Dan Ford was a Safety guy. They were both true, blue, unionists. Their preference was that ALPA push for mergers to restore Delta flying to Delta. If Delta would not do Delta flying, then they thought the Delta MEC should keep its hands off the flying they did not want to perform and that they (ASA & Comair) should be able to get their own scope which bound Delta.
Scope of course is the first part of securing higher pay. Higher pay at the regionals should have reduced management's incentive to outsource.
That is why there really a commonality of interest between mainline and regional. To build our house we need them to hold up their end of the foundation. To do so, they need scope.
The real battle was with the "outsourcing is good" contingent. Their model is predicated on the lowest cost feed (a phrase heard again yesterday coming from a Delta MEC member). In order to justify their divisions within our union lawyers serving their interest came up with the logic that indirectly screwed the TWA guys merger and which screws our attempts to restrain outsourcing today.
Thanks for finding a source. Ken Cooksey was my MEC Chairman and Dan Ford was a Safety guy. They were both true, blue, unionists. Their preference was that ALPA push for mergers to restore Delta flying to Delta. If Delta would not do Delta flying, then they thought the Delta MEC should keep its hands off the flying they did not want to perform and that they (ASA & Comair) should be able to get their own scope which bound Delta.
Scope of course is the first part of securing higher pay. Higher pay at the regionals should have reduced management's incentive to outsource.
That is why there really a commonality of interest between mainline and regional. To build our house we need them to hold up their end of the foundation. To do so, they need scope.
The real battle was with the "outsourcing is good" contingent. Their model is predicated on the lowest cost feed (a phrase heard again yesterday coming from a Delta MEC member). In order to justify their divisions within our union lawyers serving their interest came up with the logic that indirectly screwed the TWA guys merger and which screws our attempts to restrain outsourcing today.
02-10-2012, 06:07 PM
#7450
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,544
I agree with all that in theory too. Just to kick the horse one more time though, it wasn't just mean old mainline vs righteous and noble trade unionist regionals. Ken and Dan's side of the fence absolutely saw an opportunity for an epic seniority grab and they went "all in" and played a hand they didn't have.
Their personal view, and I know this for a fact and even doubt they would deny it to this day if you phrased the question carefully, was that once a merger/PID was agreed upon, a staple was the absolute floor that was theoretically possible and DOH was the money shot, but the outcome would, in their estimation, be somewhere in between.
When pilots asked them at PID roadshows (just prior to the RJDC) about going to Delta as a new hire, they were specifically advised against it because they would "likely lose seniority". The PID roadshows had Q&A handouts that specifically stated the same thing in writing as their formal opinion.
The PID then morphed seamlessly into the RJDC and at that point the public statements, verbally and in writing, about how the SLI would shake out stopped but behind closed doors it was exactly the same. And why wouldn't it be, when it was the same guys anyway.
There was arrogance and dropped balls on BOTH sides back then, which is a shame because it was the best opportunity that our profession will ever see with 2 connection carriers doing the vast majority of connection flying, one lone wolf non union connection carrier with expiring contracts and the mainline all with open books, a CEO that wanted a deal and the leverage of at least one strike.
Water under the bridge though. Whatever. So where do we go from here? Unity is crucial, but DALPA/DPA can't involve connection carriers that don't first agree to a 100% seniority prenup up front. Not just day one, but the day before day one. Before the meeting room is even booked to discuss it, there has to be an agreement that no DCI pilot will be senior to any DL pilot in any manner, way, shape or form. There are numerous ways to protect DCI job interests with a master list flow through, staple, double staple, etc by controlling cross bidding/flowing rights and a "lock in" provision for DCI pilots that don't want to move on, "no bump and flush" language and many other solutions. But a prenup on day one that guarantees no DL pilot loses one number of seniority to any DCI pilot is mandatory. If that can not be achieved, DALPA/DPA needs to fix the issues unilaterally.
That said, if DALPA isn't willing, or isn't "allowed" by ALPA natl, to fix scope at the DCI level then we need to pursue a bargaining agent that is.
Have we met and conferred yet? If so, what was said? Will DCI MEC's be privy to DALPA policy and ambitions that DL line pilots will not?
Their personal view, and I know this for a fact and even doubt they would deny it to this day if you phrased the question carefully, was that once a merger/PID was agreed upon, a staple was the absolute floor that was theoretically possible and DOH was the money shot, but the outcome would, in their estimation, be somewhere in between.
When pilots asked them at PID roadshows (just prior to the RJDC) about going to Delta as a new hire, they were specifically advised against it because they would "likely lose seniority". The PID roadshows had Q&A handouts that specifically stated the same thing in writing as their formal opinion.
The PID then morphed seamlessly into the RJDC and at that point the public statements, verbally and in writing, about how the SLI would shake out stopped but behind closed doors it was exactly the same. And why wouldn't it be, when it was the same guys anyway.
There was arrogance and dropped balls on BOTH sides back then, which is a shame because it was the best opportunity that our profession will ever see with 2 connection carriers doing the vast majority of connection flying, one lone wolf non union connection carrier with expiring contracts and the mainline all with open books, a CEO that wanted a deal and the leverage of at least one strike.
Water under the bridge though. Whatever. So where do we go from here? Unity is crucial, but DALPA/DPA can't involve connection carriers that don't first agree to a 100% seniority prenup up front. Not just day one, but the day before day one. Before the meeting room is even booked to discuss it, there has to be an agreement that no DCI pilot will be senior to any DL pilot in any manner, way, shape or form. There are numerous ways to protect DCI job interests with a master list flow through, staple, double staple, etc by controlling cross bidding/flowing rights and a "lock in" provision for DCI pilots that don't want to move on, "no bump and flush" language and many other solutions. But a prenup on day one that guarantees no DL pilot loses one number of seniority to any DCI pilot is mandatory. If that can not be achieved, DALPA/DPA needs to fix the issues unilaterally.
That said, if DALPA isn't willing, or isn't "allowed" by ALPA natl, to fix scope at the DCI level then we need to pursue a bargaining agent that is.
Have we met and conferred yet? If so, what was said? Will DCI MEC's be privy to DALPA policy and ambitions that DL line pilots will not?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Lbell911
Regional
23
04-22-2012 11:33 AM
