I don't have a lot of time to debate here today since I have a World Cup VIP ticket with my name on it this afternoon but....
yes, I'll engage in fair debate with those who do the same.
I enjoy your participation here so I can debunk the claims of the TWU and IAM at the same time.
Give it a shot. But at the same time do not ignore items that are given to you in return or I am back to ignoring you as an unreliable source for the debate.
the simple fact is that no one outside of DL HDQ knows the distribution of employees at each pay scale.
Maybe not to a precise percentage but the averages can speak volumes as well.
Kev can give his perspective and I am glad to read it but it reflects his world. Like it or not, the company does have access to information as a non-union company that unionized employees might have via their union. Even unions don't have employee specific pay information, though.
having that information or not is part of the choice DL employees will make in whether they want a union or not.
That's a supposition that you can not claim. Being compensated well is every persons true #1 priority.
but having information also has implications - and DL employees don't see a need to change a system that works for them - with or without the details.
Supposition. You do not speak for ALL of the employees of DL and no one does.
as for the whole ready reserve issue, as long as ANY company can find people to work at a given wage, they will pay it.
Unfortunately agreed. People have to stand up to demand better or they will be stepped on. That's their choice.
It is no different than jet fuel or IT services. If someone will provide the service for the price a company is willing to pay, there is a market.
Yep.
and the station closures at AA and UA are both proof that when unions are unwilling to find solutions to lower costs, then the company will move to do that and cut jobs in that city in the process.
Agreed again since market forces especially for an airline need to be factored in. Unless the airlines were willing to subsidize small airports from the revenue they get in hubs? Airline workers are not the only ones being hearded into hubs or large cities but the American populace as well.
The very reason why DL uses the RR system is to provide the staffing flexibility to maintain as many full-time jobs as it can while supplementing the staffing model with low cost employees
Debatable unless one could actually see the models used?
In fact, Kevin has even posted here that by his calculations, RRs probably cost DL less than outsourced employees because there is no middleman
Is a person better off having a job under those RR guidelines than not being afforded it at all and continuing to seek something else? That's up to the individual though.
we've been thru the job transfer procedures but DL's procedures are identical to other airlines except that DL does not allow an employee who has been affected by a displacement to bump an existing employee out of their place.
I believe in the seniority system. Although it doesn't reward a good employee over a bad one it also does serve though to keep out rampant favoritism. How to be able to serve both equally is certainly an issue.
Given that there are far fewer employees who are displaced than could be bumped by someone who is displaced, DL's system makes more sense.
From a business perspective yes. From a personal one, no.
further, DL has consistently found jobs for impacted workers, many times in lower cost of living stations, even if people don't like ATL.
I am a supporter of COLA's depending on geographical locations. Someone who works in DFW should not make the same wages as someone in NYC, IMO.
In the reduction mechanics at DTW, DL at the same time opened several new cities to DL MTC including SAN, MSY, and BNA, IIRC, and the displaced mechanics got preference over any other mechanics who wanted to bid into that city.
That's how it's done under the Union seniority structure you know.
