TA 2012 Contract Highlights
06-18-2012, 01:17 PM
#91
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
If you want to vote NO because you don't want to give up more RJs then fine, but quit grasping at straws.
06-18-2012, 01:50 PM
#92
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: 777 Sim Instructor
Posts: 745
It doesn't and alfaromeo knows it. The TA does not mandate the purchase, lease or acquisition of even one 717 much less 88 of them. Alfa is an unelected MEC bureaucrat that continually lies to us even though it's easily proven that he's lying. He just doesn't care. He's so convinced his job as an MEC admin is secure, he is simply not concerned about lying.
Carl
Carl
06-18-2012, 01:54 PM
#93
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: 7ERB
Posts: 2,039
What happens when they want to put 82 seats in the 76 seater? or even worst 90 seats? What happens after they get the 717s and they decide to park old 757, A320s, 747s etc?
Please think about the long term. If you vote this TA down, you are still going to get paid. You are still going to pick up GS. You are still able to make that 19% up.
After taxes, how much is that 19% anyway? Is it worth the potential for Scope degradation?
One Group,
TEN
06-18-2012, 02:39 PM
#94
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: 777 Sim Instructor
Posts: 745
Finis,
What happens when they want to put 82 seats in the 76 seater? or even worst 90 seats? What happens after they get the 717s and they decide to park old 757, A320s, 747s etc?
Please think about the long term. If you vote this TA down, you are still going to get paid. You are still going to pick up GS. You are still able to make that 19% up.
After taxes, how much is that 19% anyway? Is it worth the potential for Scope degradation?
One Group,
TEN
What happens when they want to put 82 seats in the 76 seater? or even worst 90 seats? What happens after they get the 717s and they decide to park old 757, A320s, 747s etc?
Please think about the long term. If you vote this TA down, you are still going to get paid. You are still going to pick up GS. You are still able to make that 19% up.
After taxes, how much is that 19% anyway? Is it worth the potential for Scope degradation?
One Group,
TEN
06-18-2012, 03:31 PM
#95
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: west coast wannabe
Posts: 815
Again long term I think this TA is an improvement in scope, we can agree to disagree on that. You can play the what if game from both sides, we have a contract that does not allow anymore than 76 seaters, period ! What if Europe tanks, what if we get hit by a meteorite then you will never make up the lost income from this TA. Let's deal with current facts. You don't like the section 1 of this TA, I got it, no what if's.
06-18-2012, 04:45 PM
#96
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: right for a long, long time
Posts: 2,642
First of all, DALPA should not use any mention of caps on DCI, especially in BOLD font in 2015, presumably, because they fail that promise. Second of all, how are we "capping" 76 seaters? Maybe i need to reread the definition of the word, but last i checked, there will be 70 NEW LARGE GAUGE RJ not flown by DL pilots. They will be entered into looooong term lease, probably much longer terms than 717. So how does it put us at an advantage in the long term? Do you think the company isnt gonna borrow from the playbook and ask us for scope trade for a few shiny nickels?
Long term leases are what got DAL in trouble with RJ's in the first place!
06-18-2012, 06:03 PM
#98
Inventory survival kit ..
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: Seeking no jacket required rotations
Posts: 1,069
Just a minor annoyance if management has to keep 50 seat RJs - can't claim that the entire system is equipped with Economy Comfort. Won't stop them from making the claim about mainline.
06-18-2012, 06:29 PM
#100
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
It doesn't and alfaromeo knows it. The TA does not mandate the purchase, lease or acquisition of even one 717 much less 88 of them. Alfa is an unelected MEC bureaucrat that continually lies to us even though it's easily proven that he's lying. He just doesn't care. He's so convinced his job as an MEC admin is secure, he is simply not concerned about lying.
Carl
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
