Originally Posted by Bucking Bar

Carl,

Not necessarily. If money is saved from another part of the operation and applied to pilot pay, the net number may be "cost neutral" but to we pilots, it is a gain. In the case of C2012 management reported savings from up gauging the operation and saving on maintenance expense.

ALPA, generally, tries to stay away from forward-looking projections and stick to real, after the fact, measured results. You can tell us how your pay has worked out since C2012. My Delta W2 delta between years has been (without changing equipment or bidding status):

2011 - Baseline
2012 - 4%
2013 - 27.5%
2014 - 80%

Frankly; when I just ran these numbers they surprised me (income from other jobs outside of Delta has declined, offsetting gains). My best guess is the other factors involved are longevity bumps and the ability to pick up a green slip every other month or so. Because of my other hobbies, I never get more than a one or two-day greenie. All in I fly+credit between 75 and 95 a month.

Contract 2012's scope was a very definite improvement for the pilots which could be reported to investors as "cost neutral" or perhaps even accretive to the Company's bottom line. Using unit cost analysis, flying a passenger on a 717 may be more efficient to Delta than an old CRJ with a topped out crew, but for the new 717 Captain at Delta going to nearly $200 an hour is usually a big raise.

Not sure who you mean by "you guys." You and I are both Delta pilots. I voted against C2012, but with the clarity of 20/20 hindsight it worked well. C2012 was certainly preferable to stagnation.

Continued up gauging will benefit both the pilots and Delta. I get the feeling (subjectively) that the push for C2015 is going to be improvements that you feel more on your end of the seniority list (which will benefit all of us).