Originally Posted by
TheManager
I'll take an exception to this. My fellow pilots and I want some things that will cost the company $.
* Industry leading duty period average increased from our current 5:15 to 5:42(SWA). Eliminate the back side of the clock carve outs.
* Increasing vacation pay from 3:15 to the industry leading 6 (FDX). Sh!t, I'd even settle for 5 but don't tell them that.
* increasing training pay that is currently 3:45 to the industry leading 4:23 to 4:30 range (SWA & others).
* Oh, and the most important, obtaining a medical plan that is some what affordable. Reference Southwest Airlines PPO plan that comes in way below our plans.
Shiz, your response didn't seem to track with what PD and Check were writing. No one says we should demand they start "unprofitable operations" like that ridiculous 777 service from ATL to MCO.
What they are saying is that we need to negotiate and obtain benefits that will cost the company money. By nature, they will be less profitable. We will have to break some eggs to make this omelette.
They (Pd and check) are taking exception to those who believe that by merely asking and bargaining for such items as listed above, they will cost the company money, and thus they take it upon themselves to try and "tamp down our costs."
In order to have a truly industry leading contract that even gets close to getting our '96 wages back (adjusted for inflation) instead of C2k restoration, it is not going to be one of those "zero cost contracts" that management parrots to Wall Street. It's going to have an impact on their profitability.
Is that wrong?
No, we are much closer on the "want list" than I think either of us want to admit. We absolutely should want things like that (and have said as much over and over again).
I want to bargain for increases in the pilot's bank accounts, not things that merely reduce the revenue generating capacity of the airline. Cut it with the "cost neutral" contract BS. It is NOT cost neutral to us, it merely took the DAL money pie and cut another slice smaller so we could have a bigger slice. The pie size didn't change... The pie is getting bigger and bigger each year, and I completely agree that we need to make sure that our slice keeps growing with the increase in pie size. My question is how do we force the Company's hand to give it? Where is the leverage? How useful is the NMB for us?
I'm up 31% yoy over what would have happened absent C2012. Enough? No! is 19.7% in rates plus tons of other increases a much better starting point for C2015 openers in 13.3 months? Yes!
(On the 88, in 2013 my per day avg. was 6:28 due to C2012 improvements, 2012 Jan.-Jun. was 5:38)
I forsee it will take us at least 12 months this time around, from my perspective RA doesn't have a "need for speed" that he is willing to pay for this time. I imagine it will be at least until UAL catches up to us and AMR is due for their reset is when he will allow a deal to finish, just to make sure that the competition's costs will rise to a similar degree much like this last round which forced UAL to come way up on their offer and AMR to get a much "less horrible" deal because we made a 12-30% jump ahead of their already lagging agreements.
T wants rates and LBP, you want rigs and pay, PD and FTB want every Delta painted aircraft to have Delta pilots. We won't get all of everything, so how do we split up the bigger chunk of pie?
I want 30% increase on day one next time... The bigger question is how long will I wait for "day one" to occur and could I get the same result with something that looks less sexy but achieves the same result?
To be fair, I got a 31% increase in the first year under C2012 without changing aircraft or category seniority, do that again to me please! Which at 4/8/3/3* would mean a bunch of those little pieces of sneaky money you mention above.. Throw me in that briar patch.
*Not saying 4/8/3/3 is my number, but I'll take 30% immediate improvements even if they don't appear big on the surface