Hillbilly

I disagree that it doesn't matter that scope is a local issue. I do agree that ALPA national does not communicate on every issue.

zoomiezombie

The DPA's milk toast constitution statement on outsourcing:
Summary: Limited to seeking to capture to the maximum extent possible. Will try to do this, may not be successful i.e. no real change.

Mike Protack on first DPA contract priorities:Summary: Reduce doesn't mean end. Why only Delta routes? Planes in different liveries can be flown by other pilots? Why only regional scope? Why is DPA working to help regionals get seniority numbers when all they do is complain (last email) about the DCI hiring language in our current contract?

Wishy washy language is not a path to getting all flying back it's a goal. There's still no plan, just a promise. It's not a declarative statement to get all flying back, it's an attempt to try and nothing more. I might go in to the CPO and attempt to get him to give me Thanksgiving off to the maximum extent possible

Carl Spackler

Thanks for posting the DPA's constitution statement. Thanks further for your personal opinion of the language as being "milk toast." Please post the ALPA constitution's statement on outsourcing. I'd like to see ALPA's language so that we can compare levels of "milk toastiness."

Again, comparisons to ALPA's constitutional language will be important.

Carl

Carl Spackler

Thank you again for posting DPA's contract priorities. For compare and contrast purposes, please post DALPA's contract priorities regarding scope.

Carl

johnso29

Delta MEC Update 13-03

“One of the major objectives of this Section 6 negotiation, as determined by the survey, was to increase the amount of flying done by the mainline. While scope is arguably the most complicated section of the PWA, the goal was quite simple: Seek to improve the ratio of flying done by the mainline, increase mainline block hours, and increase mainline aircraft.”

So our goals were to:

 Improve the ratio of flying done by mainline versus DCI

 Increase mainline block hours

 Increase mainline aircraft

There are a number of ways to measure these objectives. In this case, we use:

 Block hour ratio
 Available seat mile (ASM) ratio
 Domestic fleet count
 Scheduled seat ratio
 Scheduled seat count


No different than what DPA states by ending their goal with "to the maximum extent possible." With almost 12,000 pilots they're leaving the definition wide open. No solid path. Just promises with no guarantees outside of "we'll try."

Carl Spackler

Delta management has signed long term contracts to outsource our jobs. Reducing by negotiating sunsets is our only real option at this point...thanks to ALPA. Calling for more than reductions is just a cynical attempt, by those like you who know better, to portray DPA as lacking in knowledge.

Uhhh, because DPA can only negotiate for Delta pilots and Delta branded business.

Have to start with the Delta livery because its the most understandable and defensible. Later, we can deal with the other forms of ALPA sanctioned outsourcing that you've illustrated here.

See above.

Because helping our brothers to the extent that we can is the right thing to do. The complaints about the current language is about the fact that we are forced by the "Meet and Confer" settlement to allow other MEC's to have direct input into our Section 1. DPA would have no such requirement because DPA was not part of the ALPA settlement.

As an ALPA supporter, you're in no position to complain about language. Your side is the king of meaningless and indefensible language. Indefensible as defined by the very ALPA lawyers who wrote the language.

Carl

PurpleTurtle

Outsourcing by ALPA..?. Sure, their Merger Policy explicitly outsources the task of merging competing ALPA pilot groups....

Oh, I'm sorry, you meant ALPA outsourcing language that was meant to reduce outsourcing, not mandate more.

PurpleTurtle

I have always paid dues to the union and will always be a member in good standing.

The reason I no longer pay dues to ALPA is because I and my fellow pilots finally admitted a hard reality... Our ALPA reps were ignoring, limiting, and preventing pilot votes. ALPA National never had any concern for us (why would they? They had too many dues groups to keep happy..). And our ALPA local leaders had too many temptations to chase after $400K ALPA National jobs, rather than listen to the line pilot if we doubted something that ALPA National told us was in our best interests. We had an opinion and ALPA didn't allow us to have it.

We went to the NMB and secured for ourselves the right to vote about that! Some of us wanted to keep the ALPA status quo, but a majority did not.

PurpleTurtle

The temptation for divided loyalties is inherent to the ALPA system. An ALPA rep is always torn between ALPA National's interests and the Delta pilot interests. It's just a fact. Delta's local ALPA reps rely on ALPA "expert consultants" that are paid for by ALPA National. And for some, the benefits of an ALPA National job can also be a temptation.

ALPA's constitution insulates many reps from the reach of dissatisfied members... An in house union can correct that.

PurpleTurtle

I don't care who you all chose to represent you at DELTA. It's up to you all. That is the only point. It's up to you.

I'm pro pilot, and I happen to believe my reps better understand their role and who they work for if they want to continue in the employ of the pilots. In my opinion they aren't hired to sell back to me fear or hate.

Cheers