Due to new Dutch laws the pension scheme has changed as of 01/01/2006. You now build up 1.95% of your total years pay (including your vacation pay and your end year bonus (set at 8%, for pilots employed before April, 2005). Variable between 4-12% depending on company performance for all new pilots, and older ones who have opted for the new scheme.
On top of this the company participates in the new "levensloop" saving scheme in order to allow the same pension total as before 01-01-2006. Pilots can opt for this or take the money (average of 6%) and invest or spend it themselves, this will result in a lower pension than before the new law took effect.
Starting February, 2008 the first of at least 4 Boeing 777-300ER will start to arrive. And an additional 5 A330-200 options have been converted from options to orders.
A Boeing 747-400ERF (freighter) which was initially scheduled to join the fleet in February, 2007 has now been secunded to parent airline Air France for a period of at least 18 months (being operated by Air France crews).
Also an additional 4 Fokker 100's are coming in the next year. And 8 more Boeing 737-800's have been ordered as replacements for Boeing 737-400's.
Sources: PilotJobsNetwork.com
***** Note the currency converter in the middle of the page and the published date. 6 years ago.******
Last edited by TheManager; 03-01-2012 at 06:59 AM.
Advertising above will not show if you are a registered user.
This ^^^^ attitude is the biggest difference I see as a DALPA subject rather than an NWA ALPA member. "Whistling past the graveyard" is going to do nothing to alter reality. NWA ALPA always went into negotiations fully expecting to have to bet our jobs in the high stakes business of labor negotiations. And they did. Multiple times. Post 911, the company successfully linked pension legislation in Washington with the BK contract and divided and conquered.
DALPA, on the other hand, clings to the perception that we are "All in this together" with management, and "Our Special Relationship" will bring us an equitable response. If we can only let someone else go before us, then we can get Unical, or SWA plus __%. While this pattern bargaining was successful in the past, in case you haven't noticed, the current guys on the "other side of the table" are the same ones that we had to go eyeball to eyeball with at NWA. Until we elect representation that sees opportunity as opposed to danger, all we are doing is waiting for our masters to serve the scraps. It doesn't matter here if you are a widebody CA, LCA, "throne king" on Virginia Avenue or a Mad Dog FO in NYC, every one of us is still in bankruptcy, and the only solace anyone is taking is that they are at least doing better than someone else. We are and have been "flatlined", and hoping that someone else's "turn in the box" changes that, is "whistling past the graveyard".
He replaced Michelle Burns I believe. She was the Stephen Wolf of CFOs.. In other words, the standard set was pretty low, so he was OK I guess..
Halter probably got a better offer somewhere else. CFO's come and go all the time. The new guy is a home grown type. Hired when he was 25 as an analyst at DL, in 1997. That makes him 40 now, about the same seniority as a DL 767 FO. In 2011, his predecessor made 2.25 Million total compensation. Have a nice day
This ^^^^ attitude is the biggest difference I see as a DALPA subject rather than an NWA ALPA member. "Whistling past the graveyard" is going to do nothing to alter reality. NWA ALPA always went into negotiations fully expecting to have to bet our jobs in the high stakes business of labor negotiations. And they did. Multiple times. Post 911, the company successfully linked pension legislation in Washington with the BK contract and divided and conquered.
DALPA, on the other hand, clings to the perception that we are "All in this together" with management, and "Our Special Relationship" will bring us an equitable response. If we can only let someone else go before us, then we can get Unical, or SWA plus __%. While this pattern bargaining was successful in the past, in case you haven't noticed, the current guys on the "other side of the table" are the same ones that we had to go eyeball to eyeball with at NWA. Until we elect representation that sees opportunity as opposed to danger, all we are doing is waiting for our masters to serve the scraps. It doesn't matter here if you are a widebody CA, LCA, "throne king" on Virginia Avenue or a Mad Dog FO in NYC, every one of us is still in bankruptcy, and the only solace anyone is taking is that they are at least doing better than someone else. We are and have been "flatlined", and hoping that someone else's "turn in the box" changes that, is "whistling past the graveyard".
Everybody is entitled to an opinion. I find it fascinating though that so many fNWA guys wax nostalgic for the old days when the relationship they had with management basically sucked. I don't want that kind of work environment here. Call it koolaid drinking.. "whistling past the garveyard" whatever catch phrase you wish, but I want little to do with the way you did things at NWA... life is too short to hate coming to work wondering when management or the other employee groups are gonna screw me. But just out of curiosity, how many industry leading contracts did NWA get while you were there? How did they get those industry leading contracts? Did they get them while there was upward movement in the industry or did they somehow manage to garner wage and benefit increases contrary to what everybody else was doing? I am not "hoping" that someone else sets the bar.. we have done that in the past at Delta. But it is much easier to leapfrog if you don't live in a vacuum.
So, the company can afford to pay FA's nearly what they did pre chapter 11, right? Why not us? Why do some not think we should be back to pre chapter 11?
Is it because, cough cough, some believe we're too expensive? C2K was too much? Pilots shouldn't be paid that much? Different time? Different economy?
life is too short to hate coming to work wondering when management or the other employee groups are gonna screw me.
That's a good point. As it is now, you don't have to wonder. We are currently being compensated as if the company was in Chapter 11 and in danger of liquidation. And anyone who went through bankruptcy with Delta knows how easily the other employee groups are turned against us. Glad you don't have to "wonder" about that, T.
This ^^^^ attitude is the biggest difference I see as a DALPA subject rather than an NWA ALPA member. "Whistling past the graveyard" is going to do nothing to alter reality. NWA ALPA always went into negotiations fully expecting to have to bet our jobs in the high stakes business of labor negotiations. And they did. Multiple times. Post 911, the company successfully linked pension legislation in Washington with the BK contract and divided and conquered.
DALPA, on the other hand, clings to the perception that we are "All in this together" with management, and "Our Special Relationship" will bring us an equitable response. If we can only let someone else go before us, then we can get Unical, or SWA plus __%. While this pattern bargaining was successful in the past, in case you haven't noticed, the current guys on the "other side of the table" are the same ones that we had to go eyeball to eyeball with at NWA. Until we elect representation that sees opportunity as opposed to danger, all we are doing is waiting for our masters to serve the scraps. It doesn't matter here if you are a widebody CA, LCA, "throne king" on Virginia Avenue or a Mad Dog FO in NYC, every one of us is still in bankruptcy, and the only solace anyone is taking is that they are at least doing better than someone else. We are and have been "flatlined", and hoping that someone else's "turn in the box" changes that, is "whistling past the graveyard".
I have to take offence at the suggestion that we're not willing to bet our job. We've done it every time, and I'm sure we're willing to do it again. Our strike votes and your strike votes have not differed in any meaningful way. What you're confusing the nature of a union, and a temporary strategy used by a particular administration or adminstrations.
Another thing I get from your post is that you're incorrectly describing the nature of this so-called "special relationship". For starters, it's only "special" in the sense that we talk. The "relationship" is a means, not an end. It's not a guarantee of results, not even a guarantee to always be available to negotiate. It's only a loose policy of generally being willing to explore mutually beneficial arrangements. It's a policy of negotiating more, and more often. In that sense, we're not alone. If you look at SWA, they're very often willing to engage their management, and have often supported each other. But when they couldn't agree, i.e. their previous merger attempt, they stood fast, and apart. When it came time to trounce the AirTran pilots, they worked together.
I can't speak for the other "South" pilots, but I don't cling on to anything WRT constructive engagement: I look at it dispassionately. It's actually worked, for a brief time, and for a specific set of events. The true test of the relationship will be the next T/A. If it fails that test, that will show us the end of this strategy, and we'll need to vote accordingly. And I for one fully expect it will not work forever. For now, it deserves a shot. If opportunities come along that allow us to capture gains, I want us to be at the table. You wrote:
"...While this pattern bargaining was successful in the past, in case you haven't noticed, the current guys on the "other side of the table" are the same ones that we had to go eyeball to eyeball with at NWA. Until we elect representation that sees opportunity as opposed to danger, all we are doing is waiting for our masters to serve the scraps..."
I couldn't agree more. Whatever you did at NW, and whatever we did at Delta, under the traditional model of pattern bargaining isn't working now. I sure as hell don't want to negotiate "United Plus" this time around. So opportunities come along, and groups that know how to be at the table gain. That's how we did it for the merger, isn't it?
I think the only difference between what you might have seen, and what ALPA has been doing recently at Delta is that we've been willing to talk to them. Period. If you think "South" pilots think it's cute, special, or touching, to have a "relationship" with management, you're wrong.
I think the company is actually on board with that thought. They'd like to have more choice in who they select, at least that was the sentiment I got from BB at indoc.
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
