Delta Air Lines to Build Heavy Maintenance Facility in Queretaro, Mexico

[WorldTraveler]

No I didn't. You've decided that's what I said in order to promote your idea of how the discussion should go.

I have said that the CRP is wholly ineffectual since no matter the verdict delivered by one's peers, it can always be overturned by mgmt.

Systems such as the CRP & FIT/EIG teams are paper tigers designed to give the illusion that employees have an actual say. DL is not the first company to use them, nor will they be the last.
One cannot also their seniority to freely move back and forth between departments. This is something the company explicitly promoted as an improvement over classification seniority. It simply doesn't happen that way.

In a RIF, you do not own your seniority; the company tells you where you can or cannot go (if anywhere). If you want to move from the ramp to the counter, you also have to interview.


My writing something that doesn't mesh with your narrative does not mean it's false.

Kevin,
This is the quote I made.

I know EXACTLY what protections DL contract and non-contract employees have.

This is your response:

Then you know the answer for the latter group is "none."

Perhaps a little more than a one sentence reply to the topic would have removed any doubt as to what you meant.

If you knew there was an appeals process, then it is not accurate to argue that DL employees don’t have any protection.

If you believe the systems have are inadequate, that is your opinion and I will most certainly recognize your ability to come to that assessment.
IN the absence of any concrete data about which system “saved” more jobs, then it is a subjective assessment on both of our parts as to which system is better. And I will not argue you with you about which is better.

I will present historically verifiable data about which airline saved more jobs in BK.

I will also note the objective fact that your colleagues do not believe that the concerns you have about job protection from DL are credible or at least on balance with the entire employment “contract” (whether one actually exists or not) is worth hiring a union to attempt to regain those rights.

To reinforce the issue Glenn raised, I absolutely do value the opinions and thought processes of each person on this forum and I respect the passion each person has for what they believe, and that includes you.

I truly want you and Glenn and Dawg and Southwind and every other DL employee – and not just DL employees – to achieve what they want… but we also have to learn to work within an environment that doesn’t give us all we want. There are clearly a lot of your DL colleagues who agree with you but there are clearly more that do not – or least do not believe a union is the answer.

If you (each of you) want to stay at DL – and I see no indication you do not – then you have to figure out how to work within a system that is obviously not totally to your liking. I want you to win – each of you. But sometimes winning means shifting the priorities you have, recognizing you might not achieve them in your current environment, or focusing your energies on another environment where your chances of obtaining what you want is far greater.

Forgive me, Kev, if I misinterpreted what you said or unfairly characterized your assessment of the situation.

 

[Kev3188]

If you knew there was an appeals process, then it is not accurate to argue that DL employees don’t have any protection.

You are (conveniently?) conflating 2 separate issues.

As at will employees, there is no protection, other than protected class status. Remember, "at any time, for any reason."

That is separate from the sham that is the CRP.

Forgive me, Kev, if I misinterpreted what you said or unfairly characterized your assessment of the situation.

You have done both. Repeatedly.

 

[WorldTraveler]

No, I don't think I am conflating two separate issues because your one sentence reply left no context for me to know which issue you were addressing.
If you had spelled out specifically what you were saying DL employees didn't have, then there would have been no doubt what you meant and I could have resonded or not on that basis.

You can argue that "at will" means employees have no protection and in theory you might be right.
IN practice, which is what people care about for any situation, DL employees have enjoyed protections as good as or better than those of other people.
I respect the difference of opinion you have with me on that issue but your colleagues either don't see it as an issue or one that, in the totality of the employment experience, a union can solve.

DL does have processes such as employee engagement teams (whatever they are called), appeals processes etc that DL employees do apparently believe provides them w/ sufficient participation, or once again, not anything that a union could do better.

And for misinterpreting or unfairly characterizing what I have said, I will ask once again for your forgiveness.

Perhaps a little less focus on economy of words and a little more focus on ensuring that I understand exactly what you- and others are saying and quoting - would help.

We absolutely can have productive conversation based on both objective and subjective issues... and Glenn's point is a very good reminder that there are people behind these nameless avatars and we need to respect what each person stands for and not just thrash at ideas - which I can easily do.

 

[Kev3188]

Jesus...

You can't even try to be contrite w/o casting blame.

Whatever makes you feel validated, I guess.

Carry on...

 

[BoeingBoy]

No, Jim, you are patently wrong.

The usual - anyone who disagrees with you is always wrong and you're never wrong. Such an ego.

I'd just invite anyone to review our exchange from the start to see your "evolving" position and how you say one thing only to deny saying it later. Let the readers decide who's full of BS...

Jim

 

[WorldTraveler]

Jim,
since this is a public discussion board, my positions are here for all to see.

Truth, however, is not subject to a popularity contest. Never has, never will be.

For things that are black and white objective, there is no difficulty in figuring out who is right.

I don't mind allowing my positions to be measured against the test of time. A great feature of this board is that threads never are archived.


Kev,
I believed I was being contrite for the misrepresentation or unfair characterization.... but I can't take responsibility for not understanding something because you did not use enough words to convey what you meant. I can take responsibility for not asking you to clarify your position earlier... and will attempt to do that in the future- as I will with Jim since he and I seem to be perpetually not understanding each other.



All the best to you both.

 

[Airlinelifer]

WT, During the integration period, the 30 junior DL rampers at my station
were "told" that they needed to put in for open positions across the system because they "might not be able to hold" their position during the integration with NW rampers. Some of them came to our bagroom (NW) area and told me of what was happening and I told them unless you have a letter stating a RIF, I would just stay put, but many of them were too scared and put in for open positions. DL had junior rampers that held their ground and didn't make a move (and stayed) while senior agents in that group (the ones that have kids in college/mortgages didn't want to risk being out of work, did'nt take our advice and left the station). To me personally this was uncalled for.

Whatever the final headcount that management decided was going to be and hand out the appropriate amount of RIFs, but they didn't do that, they went with a scare tactic. The employees were deemed to have left "voluntarily" with NO chance of ever returning their positions at the station.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I am indeed aware that DL reduces staffing thru the exact methods you cite. I'm not going to defend them.

I still will ask, though, whether in total DL employees - which now include the integrated workforce - believe that tactics such as the above are enough to cause employees to choose to have a union represent them. So far, they have not said that is something they want. And that sentiment was repeated across multiple work groups including separate large ACS groups.

Despite some people's attempts to frame me otherwise, I have never said DL has got it all right. I have repeatedly asked the question on balance whether a union can provide a better overall work experience while pointing out that the majority of non-pilot personnel do not believe they can.

I suspect part of the "forgiveness" for what took place is that a relatively small number of people were affected relative to the whole workforce... I am sure those people who were affected won't soon forget.
At the same time, most people can recognize that an event such as a merger happens very rarely and thus the chance of something like that happening to an employee again are very slim.

Even if DL engages in another merger, it is highly unlikely it will be of the size and scope of the DL/NW merger.

Yes, you are right... it is just a job.... and I think way too many people have expectations that it should be more than that.

 

[southwind]

If all else fails, being able to exercise one's seniority on the system w/in their current classification (department).
We're talking about someone facing hitting the street, not someone that merely wants a change of scenery. Two very different scenarios.

Not sure how it went down, during the RIF, on the ramp, but what you expressed above, is exactely how it went down at TechOps. You were able to displace someone, who was junior to you, within the same classification and sometimes that meant a change of scenery, a lot of Dallas people here at TechOps, in order to not hit the street !

 

[WorldTraveler]

That policy does not exist in ACS or in Res.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Southwind,
does the RIF policy that was used during the consolidation of MTC actually exist on paper? I don't really think it does... and that simply proves the point that just because a policy doesn't exist in writing DL can't use it.

Actually, there is no written policy regarding bumping by seniority during 7.5 in ACS but there was a system seniority date that was determined who would remain in ACS and who would be displaced. It took about 10 years to hold full-time in ACS during 7.5.

Since seniority obviously varied between stations, DL did in fact level people in one station to accommodate others.

Those who argue for semantics can do so but if there was a system seniority date established and anyone below that date was displaced, then there was no fear that someone in one station would be displaced if that station were closed while more junior employees remained.

What I don't remember - 7.5 was almost 20 years ago - is whether those left standing could bump others who also were above the system seniority level... and I'm not sure that even happened in Tech Ops. Yes, you could bump out someone who didn't make the cut but I'm still not sure that an ACS person during 7.5 or a Tech Ops employee during maintenance consolidation could bump a person who was above the seniority that could remain on a system basis so one "survivor" could bump another survivor out of their own city.

Again, if having a benefit which allows employees to bump other employees out of a job for which both hold the seniority to retain the position on a system basis is something enough people feel is worth it, vote in a union to obtain that benefit.

But in neither 7.5 or in the maintenance consolidation was a senior employee (as defined by the system seniority date for that classification relative to seniority that could remian in ANY location) pushed out of the door if they were willing to relocate to another city to keep a job.

 

[Kev3188]

I am indeed aware that DL reduces staffing thru the exact methods you cite. I'm not going to defend them.

But you don't exactly condemn it, either.

 

[WorldTraveler]

want MY 95 theses posted on the internet?

 

[Kev3188]

???

 

[topDawg]

Not sure how it went down, during the RIF, on the ramp, but what you expressed above, is exactely how it went down at TechOps. You were able to displace someone, who was junior to you, within the same classification and sometimes that meant a change of scenery, a lot of Dallas people here at TechOps, in order to not hit the street !

Southwind is right here. I know a good bit of people who still live in Dallas/Tampa and have a crash pad here. s**ty life. (but if it is the only way to keep your wife from leaving you.....)