What if a no vote means less?
06-15-2012, 08:07 PM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: LAX ERA
Posts: 3,457
Alpha,
Never thought I'd say this to you.....well said.
Ferd
Never thought I'd say this to you.....well said.
Ferd
06-15-2012, 08:55 PM
#32
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Carl's you're probably going to make as money now as a SWA 737-500 pilot. You ought to consider buying one of these and painting it up like this:
06-15-2012, 09:27 PM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Posts: 1,724
How do you find this stuff?
"Safe image search- OFF"
Search for: "alfa romeo general lee"
Cheers
George
06-15-2012, 09:35 PM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Posts: 1,724
so if I get this right,
If the TA is rejected, we should worry about all and any possible contingencies, even the most remote bad possibilities an consider that fear when casting our vote
But
Shouldn't worry about all and any possible contingencies, even the most remote bad possibilities should the TA pass and reject that fear when casting our vote.
I think I got it.
Cheers
George
If the TA is rejected, we should worry about all and any possible contingencies, even the most remote bad possibilities an consider that fear when casting our vote
But
Shouldn't worry about all and any possible contingencies, even the most remote bad possibilities should the TA pass and reject that fear when casting our vote.
I think I got it.
Cheers
George
06-16-2012, 01:33 AM
#35
Inventory survival kit ..
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: Seeking no jacket required rotations
Posts: 1,069
Bah,
It was such a nice break being away from here, but the road shows weren't compatible iwth my schedule so ...
I have some questions and some comments and this thread looks relatives recent so ...
1. Open grievances - usually settled/withdrawn/go away with the signing of a new CBA. Is this going to happen if TA2012 is ratified by the pilots? Just wondering if I'm going to be the Wizard of Oz on my rest break on the A330-300 (man behind the curtain for those that didn't get it)
2. Delta Private Jets - Any reason we can't toss em in the same bucket as DCI for purposes of scope protection? Add the hulls and the block hours to the DCI side of the equations, count as 70/76 seat jets even though they are much smaller and keep the cap on their physical airframe size. Side note: I too think international block hours should be included in the "DCI ratio" formula but adjust the ratio numbers accordingly to keep the DCI flying level/hull count the same.
3. The "Refinery" - is under Delta's corporate umbrella as an LLC. Will its profits(if any) be included in PTIX and therefore profit sharing?
4. Scope - Scope has become the most complex part of a CBA. It takes a looong time to crunch the numbers, play mental chess and see what you THINK the effect will be on jobs. I don't think there is enough time for line pilots (the ones that are interested and can understand it) to evaluate Section 1 prior to the voting deadline. My gut feeling is I don't like the language after a time-constrained perusal, which means I am probably not seeing all of the smaller loopholes that will bite us in the a$$ later.
Which brings me to number 5.
5. Negotiating strategies - I don't know how far back things are saved on APC, but I remember a couple of things posted about negotiations a few years ago.
Management uses outside firms to advise them on many things during negotiations, one of these things being the pace of negotiations. There has been much speculation here about the reason for the early negotiations. I call it speculation because unless you signed a confidentiality agreement and are involved in negotiations in some official capacity, you did not get first hand knowledge. Why does there have to be only one reason for early negotiations?
I can see it being a good tactic to rush the pilots into a vote on a TA so they don't really get the quality time to analyze and digest content like Scope language It reminds me of a car salesman saying "Well this HUGE rebate ends on the last day of the month and corporate hasn't told us whether it will be available for buyers next month. You better buy now while the rebate is still being offered." I would rather have more time to think about the deal even if it costs me a little money, but that's just me...
Lastly, an observation - I can remember during many of the NWA MEC meetings, one of the most common arguments AGAINST allowing Membership Ratification. I believe it failed at least three times until it finally got approved. The con argument was... Management will always hold something back in case the pilots vote NO, so MemRat will not give you their best offer. I haven't seen those people (a few of which worked for ALPA National) use that argument since MemRat was finally approved. It appears to me that some of the pro and con players of that debate have swapped positions with the some anti-memrat side now saying there are no additional goodies if we vote NO, and some on the pro-memrat side saying "We think you were right and management is holding something back in case we vote NO."
FLY THE AIRPLANE, DO NOT HURRY.
It was such a nice break being away from here, but the road shows weren't compatible iwth my schedule so ...
I have some questions and some comments and this thread looks relatives recent so ...
1. Open grievances - usually settled/withdrawn/go away with the signing of a new CBA. Is this going to happen if TA2012 is ratified by the pilots? Just wondering if I'm going to be the Wizard of Oz on my rest break on the A330-300 (man behind the curtain for those that didn't get it)
2. Delta Private Jets - Any reason we can't toss em in the same bucket as DCI for purposes of scope protection? Add the hulls and the block hours to the DCI side of the equations, count as 70/76 seat jets even though they are much smaller and keep the cap on their physical airframe size. Side note: I too think international block hours should be included in the "DCI ratio" formula but adjust the ratio numbers accordingly to keep the DCI flying level/hull count the same.
3. The "Refinery" - is under Delta's corporate umbrella as an LLC. Will its profits(if any) be included in PTIX and therefore profit sharing?
4. Scope - Scope has become the most complex part of a CBA. It takes a looong time to crunch the numbers, play mental chess and see what you THINK the effect will be on jobs. I don't think there is enough time for line pilots (the ones that are interested and can understand it) to evaluate Section 1 prior to the voting deadline. My gut feeling is I don't like the language after a time-constrained perusal, which means I am probably not seeing all of the smaller loopholes that will bite us in the a$$ later.
Which brings me to number 5.
5. Negotiating strategies - I don't know how far back things are saved on APC, but I remember a couple of things posted about negotiations a few years ago.
Management uses outside firms to advise them on many things during negotiations, one of these things being the pace of negotiations. There has been much speculation here about the reason for the early negotiations. I call it speculation because unless you signed a confidentiality agreement and are involved in negotiations in some official capacity, you did not get first hand knowledge. Why does there have to be only one reason for early negotiations?
I can see it being a good tactic to rush the pilots into a vote on a TA so they don't really get the quality time to analyze and digest content like Scope language It reminds me of a car salesman saying "Well this HUGE rebate ends on the last day of the month and corporate hasn't told us whether it will be available for buyers next month. You better buy now while the rebate is still being offered." I would rather have more time to think about the deal even if it costs me a little money, but that's just me...
Lastly, an observation - I can remember during many of the NWA MEC meetings, one of the most common arguments AGAINST allowing Membership Ratification. I believe it failed at least three times until it finally got approved. The con argument was... Management will always hold something back in case the pilots vote NO, so MemRat will not give you their best offer. I haven't seen those people (a few of which worked for ALPA National) use that argument since MemRat was finally approved. It appears to me that some of the pro and con players of that debate have swapped positions with the some anti-memrat side now saying there are no additional goodies if we vote NO, and some on the pro-memrat side saying "We think you were right and management is holding something back in case we vote NO."
FLY THE AIRPLANE, DO NOT HURRY.
06-16-2012, 02:49 AM
#36
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
The first time I was just trying to figure out what a Alfa Romeo looked like. Not a sports car fan so I know little about the things. But I'm going somewhere today where there is someone who owns one of the original 01's from the show. Autographed and all.
06-16-2012, 03:21 AM
#37
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Call me a cynic, but I don't think the company aims for anything higher than what they think will pass. I don't doubt 350 counter proposals finally hit a brick wall and thus the TA is born, but, they're just trying to get to the point NC signs off on it and the MEC approves it.
Because once the MEC approves it then they know a good percentage of pilots will approve it just because ALPA approved it even if they don't like it. And the others will be persuaded by ALPA to vote yes under the guise if you don't it will only get much worse, and I think the company takes that into account.
Sure you hit a brick wall, but the wall was created for the bare minimum to pass.
Still, I want to see the ALV+15 dropped, but what I am really aiming for is not a Section 3 modification but a Section 1 modification to permitted aircraft to limit large RJs to what we have now. And sunset provisions would help me move towards a yes vote. After all, if I am allowed to vote, I should be allowed to vote as I please.
Because once the MEC approves it then they know a good percentage of pilots will approve it just because ALPA approved it even if they don't like it. And the others will be persuaded by ALPA to vote yes under the guise if you don't it will only get much worse, and I think the company takes that into account.
Sure you hit a brick wall, but the wall was created for the bare minimum to pass.
Still, I want to see the ALV+15 dropped, but what I am really aiming for is not a Section 3 modification but a Section 1 modification to permitted aircraft to limit large RJs to what we have now. And sunset provisions would help me move towards a yes vote. After all, if I am allowed to vote, I should be allowed to vote as I please.
06-16-2012, 03:56 AM
#38
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Also, I guess saying no could cause collateral damage that we are not considering and should be. If we say no, how will Jeff Smisek feel? I think he is really excited about us permitting expanded use of larger regional jets.
Jeff Smisek:
"I’m sure by now you know that Delta and its pilots’ union recently announced a tentative agreement which, among other things, provides significant pay increases, along with efficiencies for the carrier and scope changes permitting expanded use of larger regional jets. The new Delta TA raises the market pay for commercial airline pilots, and effectively sets a new competitive standard for pilot pay. We will be responsive to the impact of the new Delta TA in our negotiations and will need to adjust our current contract proposal to be competitive with the Delta TA. Our proposal will include significant pay rate increases that are competitive with the new Delta TA, as well as scope and work rules that are competitive with the new Delta TA and permit us to remain competitive in the airline business."
Jeff Smisek:
"I’m sure by now you know that Delta and its pilots’ union recently announced a tentative agreement which, among other things, provides significant pay increases, along with efficiencies for the carrier and scope changes permitting expanded use of larger regional jets. The new Delta TA raises the market pay for commercial airline pilots, and effectively sets a new competitive standard for pilot pay. We will be responsive to the impact of the new Delta TA in our negotiations and will need to adjust our current contract proposal to be competitive with the Delta TA. Our proposal will include significant pay rate increases that are competitive with the new Delta TA, as well as scope and work rules that are competitive with the new Delta TA and permit us to remain competitive in the airline business."
06-16-2012, 04:14 AM
#39
FlySmarterNotHarder
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: fifi flyer
Posts: 573
"Call me a cynic, but I don't think the company aims for anything higher than what they think will pass." "After all, if I am allowed to vote, I should be allowed to vote as I please."
---
You do a lot of pure speculating. Not without logic, but you are basing your vote by guessing what is going on. You either trust our reps did their best, as they say, or not. That's what you are voting on. Do you believe your reps or not? A vote does not turn you into a negotiator. You don't get to cherry pick. Your vote is not a line item veto. None of that is what "voting as you please" means.
---
You do a lot of pure speculating. Not without logic, but you are basing your vote by guessing what is going on. You either trust our reps did their best, as they say, or not. That's what you are voting on. Do you believe your reps or not? A vote does not turn you into a negotiator. You don't get to cherry pick. Your vote is not a line item veto. None of that is what "voting as you please" means.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
