Originally Posted by
DAL 88 Driver
No it's not. You asked how cost neutral could be a bad thing, which implies that you think it's a good thing. Given the severity of the cuts we took... in order to recover from those cuts it's going to take some very large increases to our compensation. I don't see how that can happen without increasing our cost to Delta Air Lines, which makes what I "mentioned" extremely relevant.
Certainly, from management's perspective, increasing a cost is not what they'd like to see happen. But it's a reality of business. Costs increase at times. You deal with it... adjust the business plan to reality. The cost increase that would be needed for pilot contract restoration is doable for Delta and is relatively small in the grand scheme of things.
If your perspective is that the overriding priority should be helping management keep their costs low... well, let's just say that's NOT the perspective I expect my representation to have. Not in the situation we're in where we've taken such severe cuts.
I disagree. Example. If Carl takes a 20% pay cut and I get a 30% pay increase, that's (for sake of example) cost neutral. Great for me, and sucks for Carl. I don't care about Carl. Sorry, but I don't anymore than you care about me. Now apply that process to the rest of the company. IF we make more and they don't... sucks to be them. Not my problem. Cost neutral. Your waving an agenda building flag that has nothing to do with our issues.