Originally Posted by
finis72
How's your SLI going ? Think you'll get it and a TA any time soon?
We could use the help.
The 76 seat is a big issue but we gave that up several contracts ago. Once gone hard and very costly to put the horse back in the barn. Every time I see an RJ taxi by I see 2 pilots in the cockpit. This TA gets rid of a bunch of those outsourced pilots. DL is making record profits using tons of 50 seaters so I guess I fail to see the we have leverage factor. They could easily use the $ they save from not paying us to finance the upcoming costs associated with the 50 seaters and still make record profits (been following the price of jet-a lately). This coming Feb we will get a nice profit sharing check that is not reduced by anything with or without the TA. The reduction doesn't start until 2013 with that check coming Feb 2014. If DL makes the max $2.5 bil then that reduction is about 2%. By then we will have had about 16% in raises(compounded) that we have been receiving so your statement about meager pay raise funded by our bonus is a little bogus. I don't mind a DL pilot saying the pay raise is not enough but I have trouble when the bottom of the pack who have done NOTHING to help our cause snipes at our pay rates. By the way I am leaning towards a no vote because I believe there is more $ on the table and the reward of capturing that out weighs the risk of a no vote.
I love it when guys lash out at my airline. I guess the argument is...."we suck, but you suck even more!"
Let's talk about giving up 90 seat airframes that will expand the ability of Delta management to replace DAL pilots. You guys always push the envelope in outsourcing, and SOME of you see the need to stop it. Others see a carrot (the 717's) and bite at it every time.
Pilots are always surprised when the intent of the contract is not followed. We never learn. DAL's intent is to get you looking at shiny new jets, then pull the rug out from under you in a few years and outsource most of your domestic flying.
As far as UAL goes....we were forced to take 70 seaters while in BK. CAL is still limited to 50. Since we are no longer in BK (and not in a concessionary mindset) we will look to improve our scope. That means less 70 seaters, no 90 seaters, and the 50 seat jets will disappear due to their lack of economic sense.
The 90 seaters you keep allowing are a much greater threat to our careers than the little 50 seater. You guys will be opening up a TON of new routes with the extended range and carrying capacity of these big jets.
Like you said, it's very expensive to fix scope after the fact. That's why you have to stop allowing this to continue.
Once again....parking airplanes that management doesn't want for BIG ones that they DO is not in your best interest!