Originally Posted by
Xray678
Do you really think it's right that Delta spends money training a new hire, just to have that pilot move to a different airplane weeks later?
Do I think it's right to have Delta spend money on things such as, "the cost of doing business?" Why yes, yes I do.
Then, once they've chosen to move to a different aircraft, (weeks later as your scenario suggests) they then incur a "seat-lock" after their "first move". Again, if the company is spending too much money on things like, "the cost of doing business", it is up to them to come to the pilot group for changes & offer us more for them, ("show me the money" type stuff) not vice versa with the pilot group/D-ALPA offering concessions.
The only people that get a seat lock are pilots who are displaced. I don't consider a new hire to be a displaced pilot.
I don't either, but should a new-hire that is in the first class of the year be stuck on the 88 for 12 months, while a new-hire, in a class just three months later get the 7ER due to company formulas for staffing?
They choose to come here, and then Delta spends good money to train them.
Unlike the training costs that each individual particular pilot has had to endure to reach a point even to apply to the Majors? No offense, but are you military trained?
I think it's perfectly fair to allow Delta to get some productivity out of a new hire before they spend even more money training them for another aircraft.
After Ma' Delta offers a little "green on the table" for us "giving back" to their monetary inefficiencies of running a company, not before.
We are our own worst enemies. We, as a pilot group, and a unified front with ALPA behind us for contract negotiations
,
(I know Carl, I know) need to start asking the company the same question they'll ask us in negotiations.
WHAT IS IT WORTH TO YOU!!
Fly safe,
GJ
Disclaimer1: I'm not privy to the changes that have been implemented, but if they weren't worth the 12-month training freeze (if that too is real) then we just "gave back to the company", once again.
Disclaimer2: Above comments to quoted material are in no way meant to seem antagonistic or offensive. Only intention is to spur debate and offer differing perspective.