FAA approves move by Atlanta-area airport opposed by Delta

[topDawg]

Oh, I don't know... maybe it's because they made a commitment to work for the company long before those junior employees did?

Maybe it's because without their contributions to the airline's successes, the airline might not have been able to expand into to that medium or small city they eventually bump into?

I'm guessing you see all those downsized employees as just bricks in a backpack.

And that's exactly the crap that causes employees to unionize.

But hey, go off on a tangent about how successful the company, and how great profit sharing is. If the company can't show the same commitment to employees that they're expecting employees to show, then it won't ever truly be successful.

E wins. 

 

[WorldTraveler]

Oh, I don't know... maybe it's because they made a commitment to work for the company long before those junior employees did?

Maybe it's because without their contributions to the airline's successes, the airline might not have been able to expand into to that medium or small city they eventually bump into?

I'm guessing you see all those downsized employees as just bricks in a backpack.

And that's exactly the crap that causes employees to unionize.

But hey, go off on a tangent about how successful the company, and how great profit sharing is. If the company can't show the same commitment to employees that they're expecting employees to show, then it won't ever truly be successful.

except DL employees have had the opportunity to unionize but have not.

save your diatribe. No union is going to force a company to keep a location employee that doesn't make sense. The auto industry was unable to do it and neither could dozens of plants.

the issue is whether an employee is allowed to force a half dozen other employees out of their jobs. DL employees aren't interested in a system that allows an employee to push multiple other people out of their job on their way to finding a new work location.


your real problem is that you are watching AA fall apart at the seams just like US did at the hands of US' Parker while their employees are endlessly posting that they want to be treated like DL treats its employees.

AA's union leaders sucked up to Parker, concocted his scheme to get the merger thru on terms that would cost them and the union leaders weren't smart enough to read the fine print and see that they would end up worse off than their peers at other airlines.

the employees at AA are the victim. The union leaders played right into Parker's hands.

this is the airline they wanted... and now you are going to live even more with the reality that Parker outsmarted - really lied to and deceived AA employees - and they will have to live with the consequences of their decision..... and the airline you invested half of your career in will struggle again because its employees won't give a rat's fuzzy backside while those at DL will have a living example of why unions are nothing DL employees want.

Few notes, 
 
MSY is attractive? ever been? 
 
second, Delta had opening in MSY, BNA, MCI for sure, however they also had openings in hard to fill stations like LGA, JFK, and LAX also. 
 
Delta's system is you get basically whatever you get. So AMTs who have been with DL(NW) for many moons got sent to LGA/JFK as wells as those "attractive cities". 
 
However, I also know of at least one ASM who got one of the AMT slots in MCI. 
 
 
Delta's system is jacked up. That ASM not only took at spot from an AMT in DTW, I also know of ASMs with higher time than the one who made AMT in MCI who all put in for a MCI slot and didn't get it. One got a spot in MSP, one is at LGA and one is still stuck in ATL. You call that fair, I call it horse poop. 
 
 
 
but its easy to talk about it when your a has been.........

feel free to let us know what other system than seniority was used to retain jobs in DTW and reassign jobs in other cities.

and, again, Tech Ops has shown absolutely the least interest in unionization of DL's labor groups.

all they have to do is look at the disaster that exists in maintenance at other airlines to know it is not what they want.

 

[topDawg]

feel free to let us know what other system than seniority was used to retain jobs in DTW and reassign jobs in other cities.
 

 
I don't think I could have made it any more clear that Delta doesn't use seniority. 
 
Delta uses whats called a "do what ever the f**k they want system". 

and, again, Tech Ops has shown absolutely the least interest in unionization of DL's labor groups.

Really? I didn't know that.  🙄  🙄

 

[topDawg]

the issue is whether an employee is allowed to force a half dozen other employees out of their jobs. DL employees aren't interested in a system that allows an employee to push multiple other people out of their job on their way to finding a new work location.
 

You have asked every employee that? Care to post your data then?

 

[WorldTraveler]

DL employees aren't stupid and don't seek benefits just because unions tell them they should have them.

if there was a desire to see bumping benefits, then DL employees would push the issue.

It would cost DL nothing to do allow employees to bump each other. If it was something that DL thought it was something the employees needed to keep them happy, DL would do it.

not only is DL very adept at giving employees what it takes to keep out unions but they are also very adept at keeping enough of a pulse on what their employees want.

they don't just pull pay raises and early profit sharing distributions out of thin air. they listen to their employees - which is why they repeatedly stay ahead of the unions.

DL employees don't want bumping.

if they did, there is nothing stopping DL from giving it to them.

 

[Kev3188]

It would cost DL nothing to do allow employees to bump each other.

Lol. You really don't know how all of that works, do you?

That said, can we take your answer to mean you've polled ALL DL employees? I'd like to see the data too.

 

[topDawg]

DL employees aren't stupid and don't seek benefits just because unions tell them they should have them.

if there was a desire to see bumping benefits, then DL employees would push the issue.

It would cost DL nothing to do allow employees to bump each other. If it was something that DL thought it was something the employees needed to keep them happy, DL would do it.

not only is DL very adept at giving employees what it takes to keep out unions but they are also very adept at keeping enough of a pulse on what their employees want.

they don't just pull pay raises and early profit sharing distributions out of thin air. they listen to their employees - which is why they repeatedly stay ahead of the unions.

DL employees don't want bumping.

if they did, there is nothing stopping DL from giving it to them.

Did you poll all delta employees or not? simple question again that your posting a wall-o-text of crap to deflect from answering. 

 

[robbedagain]

where the heck is jcw with his translation!   I enjoyed reading those!!   naturally WT cannot come up with the data to prove his theory so in the mean time  it is DL will do what it takes to screw who they want  when they want   how they want  at any given time

 

[WorldTraveler]

Did you poll all delta employees or not? simple question again that your posting a wall-o-text of crap to deflect from answering.

the employees spoke. 9 out of 9 defeats by the labor movement during the merger representation process.

not a single vote scheduled six years after the merger closed.

and Tech Ops didn't even have the interest to justify a vote.

Has DL Tech Ops EVER had a union election?

 

[Kev3188]

So predictable... We shoulda all known to expect this patter as a response.
 
So just to be clear; you did or did not poll every DL employee?

 

[WorldTraveler]

no I did not and neither did you.

how convenient that you love to throw out the "but you were a part of evil mgmt." routine when it suits your cause but in this case where it might mean that I know some of the key issues regarding labor, you conveniently seem to want to ignore that I very well did have access to a whole lot more labor related information than you want to admit.

DL people DO NOT WANT union style bumping policies.

and you of all people should be the strongest opponent to them.

 

[Kev3188]

no I did not and neither did you.

Isn't me making declarative statements, either.

DL people DO NOT WANT union style bumping policies.

If you haven't asked, how would you know?
 

how convenient that you love to throw out the "but you were a part of evil mgmt."

Are you referring to me? If so, I'd like to see where I've ever said that.

 

[700UW]

Unions don't tell the members what they want the members tell the negotiators what they want in a CBA.

 

[WorldTraveler]

no, they just sign secret documents with mgmt. and then try to foist the deal onto their members who are livid that they are being taken for stupid.

and, yes, Kev, my statement is declarative. DL people don't want union-style bumping.

the onus is on YOU and your union ilk to change a system which exists and DL employees have not shown an interest in changing.

 

[Kev3188]

and, yes, Kev, my statement is declarative. DL people don't want union-style bumping.

Not one? None of them? You sure?

the onus is on YOU and your union ilk to change a system which exists and DL employees have not shown an interest in changing.

If there was no interest, then there would not be two very active campaigns, either...