pileit

[IMG]//http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-22/delta-offers-pilots-27-percent-raise-as-contract-impasse-lingers?cmpid=yhoo.headline[/IMG]

Hank Kingsley

16 plus 3 3 3.

gloopy

That's 16.5/3/3/3 for a 4 year deal.

However even that robs about 4% from PS by removing DC, and then inserts another unknown and unlimited downside variable with their disgusting unlimited "officer's eat first" clause.

So really 11/3/3/3 for a total of 21% over 4 years, minus whatever they chose to remove during that time with their "officer's eat first" clause, which could be several more percent who knows. Well they know, but we won't know until we know.

Normal inflation during that time is sound 13%ish compounded (3% per year) anyway, so basically a one time 7% raise and then tread water...minus the unknown cost of their mahogany row takeaway that we won't know how much is at stake until we agree to it.

Plus all the other concessions in the AIP's.

No thanks.

Nice spin on their part though, and nice attempt to negotiate in public. Its not going to work.

Hey I know, let's agree to a 25 year contract laden with concessions for 3% a year only! What? Its a 109% raise!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

pushbackstart

Well yeah, 16.5/3/3/3 ~ 27.3%...

Devilish details and all. That rate is a bit light - probably needs to be closer to 18/3/3 to pass with retro, 16-17% DPSP and profit sharing largely untouched. That would put a 12 year 7ERB at $229,218 - 83 credit hours per month + 21.4% profit sharing, using 2015 numbers

That's before DPSP.

Add in DPSP of:
$36,674 at 16%
$38,967 at 17%

That's flying a normal schedule. We haven't even gotten to the high timers and greenslippers.

The NC thinks this is achievable. Can this MEC, and more specifically, your reps, get us to a similar deal?

gloopy

As you know, its not entirely up to us, so the answer is we don't know, and also maybe not.

But that's ok if it keeps the across the board concessions and job sales away. Those days are over. I just hope that if that is indeed their strategy that we at least stop blaming ourselves and start blaming them. Saying "a contract is a contract" and dropping the mic in our lap and walking off stage is something Wolf or Gangway or Allen would do. They at least need to be called out on that.

contrails

What is really relevant to even discuss the numbers is whether or not the scope section was opened up to allow more outsourced large CRJs and EMB175s and loosening the JV scope further at the other end, either of which would obviously be an automatic no vote from well over half of the pilots on the seniority list.

formerdal

Where did you get that the negotiating committee thinks this is achievable??

Viking busdvr

I think he meant that the NC thinks 16.5/3/3/3 is achievable if we keep the AIPs as is and give the company more large rjs and JV scope wiggle room.... 🙁

KnotSoFast

.
Absolutely NOTHING to see here.
.
Remember TA15? 8.5/6/3/3 sound familiar?
.
8.5% immediately followed six months later by 6%, so as of now, we would have had 15% (1.085 x 1.06), followed by another 3/3 if the TA had passed.

27% could be expressed mathematically as +8.5%/6%/3.3%/3.3%/3.3% <-Wow, they came up a long way. NOT!

So this breaking news that Bloomberg seems to have "stumbled" upon, is simply a PR stunt by Corp Communications to begin the PR campaign to the general public of how unreasonable we are in turning down 27%. Essentially the SAME freekin' 27% we said no to last Summer.

Gee, how generous of them. We are being unreasonable and should grab that extra 0.3% now, while it's still available. NOT!
.

pushbackstart

Re-read my post. A similar deal is out there.

The question is do our reps (all 19 voting members) have the concentration and leadership to work towards it?