Latest On Delta

willise

Mouseketeer
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
342
Here is the latest I could find, from the Atlanta Journal. There are some pretty harsh comments from the arbitrator group/ Hopefully this will get things moving in a positive way and hopefully all of our tickets will be good!!

http://www.ajc.com/business/content/business/delta/stories/0324bizdelta.html?COXnetJSessionIDbuild127=EkTLBRmUK29kZnVNeyAoWPfaam6qhuhhvPcFIi8A65xWexVl3xYo!46514656&UrAuth=%60NbNUOaNXUbTTUWUXUWUZTZU\UWUbU^UZU\U[UcTYWVVZV&urcm=y
 
Thanks for the web site. :) Here's the article, because the actual link in your post doesn't work:

Panel scolds Delta, pilots
'This is your mess, you fix it,' arbitrator says

By RUSSELL GRANTHAM
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 03/24/06
WASHINGTON — Calling the past two weeks of hearings a "shameful exercise," an arbitrator in the contract dispute between Delta Air Lines and its pilots told both sides to immediately resume talks on a consensual deal rather than make his panel hand down a decision.

"You both got us here, this is your mess, you fix it," arbitrator Richard Bloch said in a scathing conclusion to the hearings, which wound up Thursday. "Because, unlike us, when you go home, you're going to have to live with this."

Bloch said the two sides should start talks "today, tonight" toward reaching a deal before his panel's April 15 deadline for ruling on whether Delta can void the pilot contract and impose more than $300 million in annual cost cuts. Pilot union leaders have said they expect a strike if the airline imposes terms.

Bloch said the three-man panel will issue a ruling if it must, but he told the two sides that would amount to an "abandonment of responsibility that will and should haunt all of you."

Reading from a statement on behalf of the panel, Bloch quoted a hearing witness who said leadership means not being able to "unvolunteer" in a crisis. He added that "if the parties here allow us to write this opinion, you both will not only have unvolunteered, you will have bailed out."

Delta and the Air Line Pilots Association submitted their dispute to the arbitration panel after failing to meet a March 1 deadline for a new long-term contract agreement. ALPA is offering about $140 million worth of cuts, less than half of what Delta says is needed for its Chapter 11 recovery plan to work.

Despite missing the March 1 deadline, nothing has prevented Delta and ALPA from continuing talks.

"This is a shameful exercise by two groups who, it appears, have bargained successfully in fat times," Bloch said. "But in hard times the talk turns to nuclear options — shredding the labor agreement, eviscerating pensions, striking the company and generally taking actions that challenge ... a 65-year relationship."

Over the past two weeks, lawyers and representatives argued for the two sides' respective positions. ALPA says Delta's demands are too high and unfair; Delta says they are fair and critical to its recovery.

Bloch said the panel members saw "real flaws, oversights, exaggerations and shortcomings" in both sides' arguments. If forced to decide the case, he said, "we'll be choosing the less unpalatable plan."

Bloch said pilots, whose pay rose almost 35 percent from 2000 to 2004, got "an unprecedented, and very rich contract" that was signed just as the airline's financial crisis began in 2001.

He added that "management, too, has done very well for itself," noting the big bonuses and bankruptcy-proof pension trust funds the company gave top executives in 2002, amid losses and job cuts. While those executives have since been largely replaced by new management, he called such perks "both lavish and beyond reason, and, considering their timing, inexplicable."

Despite the withering criticism of both sides, Bloch said his remarks were "not intended to disparage," and he offered the arbitrators' help in forging a deal.

To prod progress, he told the parties to submit confidential progress reports on April 3 and 7.

"You need to get back to your committees. You need to get down to it now, privately," he said.

ALPA Chairman Lee Moak said afterward that "the ball is in the company's court. It takes two parties to negotiate, and they haven't negotiated to this point. We'll see if the panel's words can bring them to the table willing to negotiate in good faith."

A quick return to negotiations "is certainly the company's hope and expectation," said Delta financial chief Ed Bastian. "I would expect there to be talks as the panel suggested ... as soon as we can organize them."

The unusual hearings were set up by a temporary deal in December that cut pilots' pay by 14 percent and suspended Delta's motion in bankruptcy court to void the contract. Delta filed for Chapter 11 protection six months ago and began seeking a new round of pilot cuts about the same time. It went to court to void the contract after initial talks failed.

In late 2004, it had negotiated a $1 billion-a-year concessions deal, including a 32.5 percent wage cut for pilots. Delta has also imposed two pay cuts, job and other cutbacks on non-contract workers between then and now.

ALPA argues that Delta's demand for a long-term 18 percent cut — which would supersede the temporary December cut — would put disproportionate pain on pilots.

The airline contends both pilots and other groups would be contributing proportionate amounts to its recovery plan.

The arbitration panel can only decide whether to void the contract or reject the company's motion to do so. Bloch said risking such an all-or-nothing decision "is cynical, it is myopic and it is absurd."

Reacting to the panel's criticism, Bastian said: "I respect their opinions. I think it is a very difficult situation for both parties and I respect the enormity of the task ahead of us."
 
This seems pretty immature on the arbitration panel's part. Bloch's statement is nothing short of outright disrespect for professional business people, the airlines and the union, who honestly hold strong but opposing perspectives. His disrespect is even more reprehensible since his position exists solely because reasonable people do disagree, passionately, about matters like this, and it is his job to drive them to an amicable resolution. It sounds to me like he's failed, and seeking to blame others for his failure.
 
As part of the aviation industry (ATC) I can sort of see where he is coming from. He is in a catch 22 position. If you believe the rhethoric from either side, the airline will go under no matter which way he rules. His deadline is fast approaching, and he doesn't have the time to sort out a reasonable deal (in his mind maybe)

Who knows? I still believe there will be a deal before April 15th because failure to reach one probably means they all lose their jobs.
 

If he didn't think he could do it, he shouldn't have taken the contract in the first place.
 
Bicker, DH and I were thinking the same sort of thing. The line that confused me, though, was this one, "The arbitration panel can only decide whether to void the contract or reject the company's motion to do so. Bloch said risking such an all-or-nothing decision "is cynical, it is myopic and it is absurd."

So, the arbitrators can't decide somewhere along the lines of a happy medium? That's what I thought arbitrators did...
 
There either is a contract or there isn't, so unfortunately, no, there is no "happy medium". Imposing part of the contract, or imposing a new contract, can only be done by a judge, and that's basically the same as putting a company into receivership, with the judge putting him/herself in the position of making the company's business decisions.

Bloch's statement further calls into question his intent in taking this responsibility up.
 
I think I see...so the arbitrators decide if the contract is to be voided and then, if so, the judge will have to approve what terms will apply to the pilots and the company going forward?

Thank you!
 
I read the article you mentioned in the cincinnati enquirer.

Quote from article:

Terry Trippler, an airline expert for the online travel agency CheapSeats.com, said travelers could pay $50 per leg to switch to another airline.

Does this mean I can call Delta and ask them to switch me to another airline and only have to pay them $50.00. What if the other airline was more money, would I have to pay the difference? If this is the case I would call them now.

Also would this strike affect flights out of New York which is where I am leaving from?
 
I'm almost positive that Terry Trippler was misquoted. That statement is so inaccurate that I cannot believe any industry expert would have said something like that.
 
MrsToad said:
I think I see...so the arbitrators decide if the contract is to be voided and then, if so, the judge will have to approve what terms will apply to the pilots and the company going forward?


While I am not terribly familiar with the laws of the US, I don't think you are correct. From my understanding, at least in Canada, the arbitrator will hear best case options from both parties i.e. we need this and this to be in the contract. The parties have to be willing to put forward what they believe is their best case option because the arbitrator must choose one of the scenarios - either Delta's or ALPA's. That is why the pilots say they will strike if the Delta option is chosen by the arbitrator. If Delta wins, they get everything they asked the arbitrator for which means the pilots will strike (presumably). If ALPA wins, the airline will go under (according to Delta). That is why I say it is a Catch 22 position and the arbitrator is urging both parties to come to a mutually acceptable resolution prior to the binding arbitration decision.

At least that's how I think it works! Anyone with better insight into labour practices and law?
 
That sounds pretty accurate to me, with the exception of the "(presumably)" part -- best guess now is that the pilots won't strike, even if the ruling goes against them, though they claim they will. So, as an arbitrator, that would lead to the best rational decision to be to rule for the airline, which apparently this arbitrator doesn't want to do, for some reason.
 
I believe that the arbitrator was trying to get the parties to come to their own agreement. Having one imposed on them would leave at least one of the parties with a bad feeling - something that would come back to haunt the business. But if the two parties agree on a position, then each feels they won something and are much more likely to move forward. Its a mediation technique.
 
For those of us not in tune with the airline industry, its regulations, arbitration, and bankrupcy rules, trying to digest it all can be enough to give one quite a headache. I have my TripTik and maps from AAA as a backup plan so I will roll with the flow and try not to let it get to me.

Seriously, I hope it all works out well for both sides as I know many livelihoods depend on a workable solution; unfortunately, I have experienced what it is like to be under the stress of job uncertainty and feel for all of the workers.
 












Save Up to 30% on Rooms at Walt Disney World!

Save up to 30% on rooms at select Disney Resorts Collection hotels when you stay 5 consecutive nights or longer in late summer and early fall. Plus, enjoy other savings for shorter stays.This offer is valid for stays most nights from August 1 to October 11, 2025.
CLICK HERE













DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest

Back
Top