Originally Posted by
Denny Crane
Okay, here is a partial list which I have posted before:
Denny,
I think you've allowed some incomplete or bad analysis of the items in your list. I'm a little pressed for time, but here's a quick response.
Originally Posted by
Denny Crane
1. According to Credit Suisse (sp) after pilot contract costs are applied, this TA will put $100 million a year BACK in Deltas pocket when they apply the new profit sharing metric Company wide. This TA will actually ADD to our profit sharing!
it doesn't cost the company one red cent! Which isn't a bad thing but when you look at the whole deal, you have to consider this..
In my view, you can't use the CS or Barrons (which used incorrect numbers) reports without taking into account or discounting your item #3. The non-contracts will get a pay raise, in my view. Their pay raise will be like C2012, completely eating up the profit sharing "savings" but minimizing the additional cost growth. Neither article takes that into account. If you believe that 3B4 will protect us, then this piece doesn't work.
Originally Posted by
Denny Crane
2. Loss if Profit Sharing/buying our own raise along with changing the metric for measuring PTIX. It will lower the payout
I'm still trying to find out what the why and the cost of the profit sharing change regarding management comp, and I haven't seen an authoritative answer. As far as buying our raise, I disagree. This is a 8/3/3 contract, with $120 million paid early and 6% of profit sharing converted to pay. I view that conversion as a smart thing to do. The 2012 profit sharing that used to be worth 2.1% of pay is now worth about 1.6% due to compounding a fixed number. That same thing will play out over time on a larger scale with this conversion. Also, even though 8/3/3 is lower than 4/6.5/3/3 from 2012, it's worth the same dollar amount due to compounding.
Originally Posted by
Denny Crane
3. IMO the company will give another raise to delta employees within the nex 18 months. This should trigger 3.b.4 and provide a 3% (?) raise. Also, the change in how 3.b.4 is calculated makes this clause completely worthless
See item 1 above. I don't think the change makes 3.b.4 worthless, as UAL has profit sharing, but it does diminish its value.
Originally Posted by
Denny Crane
4. Pulling 75% of the LCA trips out affects not only the 180 claimed by Dalpa but every other FO in the category. Some will be pushed back to reserve. Don't take my word for this. Over on the other forum(where I do not post), a former negotiator said this, not me.
Absolutely a concession. Also moves toward industry standard (which sucks).
Originally Posted by
Denny Crane
5. More large RJs. I probably could be convinced this isn't a huge bad thing but it is a bad thing.
To get those 25 large RJ's we get 50 new narrowbodies AND a block hour ratio that protects against shrinkage. This continues transference of flying back to mainline 3 years ahead of our competitors and will open up a bunch of new west coast captain seats.
Originally Posted by
Denny Crane
6. Changing the JV measurement metric. In my book this is a HUGE give back.
I'm going to have to wait on the experts (I've sent questions to the code share committee), but I believe that GeorgeTg has a bunch wrong in his analysis. There are parts that are clearly concessionary (management immediately being back in compliance) but there are parts that provide us significant protections from AZ pulling out of the alliance, AF/KLM actions and our own upgauging.
Originally Posted by
Denny Crane
7. Sick leave is also a huge give here. Just moving away from the voluntary verification is huge. Allowing the company to question my doctor (who happens to be an AME) is huge. Dr. sure will not be happy about that. When does it stop?
Sick leave is clearly concessionary. It leaves us with a better program than AMR and UAL, but in my view worse than SWA (even though they don't have as many hours).
Originally Posted by
Denny Crane
8. New hire freeze to 24 months. Ok, throw them under the bus.
I don't see it as quite the bus throwing you do. They can move bases and move equipment (so not really frozen), they just have the new hire freeze added on to what their new equipment freeze is.
Originally Posted by
Denny Crane
9. On a year to year basis C2015 will be worth less than C2012. What kind of negotiating environment are we in now compared to then?
This isn't true. On a year to year basis TA2015 delivers more money sooner than C2012 did, and it has about $200+ million more in total value. TVM actually worked, and it's compounded.
Originally Posted by
Denny Crane
10. Use sick leave time to determine if you are eligible for a green slip. Fail
Concession. But it's not really sick leave time, it's FAR time had you flown the trip. If you'd have been legal to pick it up had you flown the sick trip, you'll still get the greenslip with your seniority.
Originally Posted by
Denny Crane
11. Did I mention 1.E.9? I'm really not too worried about this one. I don't think any MEC Chairman would be that dumb. But why tempt fate?
Another one I'm asking questions about intent and why it's there.
Originally Posted by
Denny Crane
12. What is it, ten or fifteen cent raise in per diem by the end of the contract. 15 minutes added to a vacation day and training. Not anywhere near enough.
The per diem is matched with AMR and UAL. The vacation and training are less than I'd like, but add another 1% to pay.
Originally Posted by
Denny Crane
Okay, here is the list you asked for. tThere are a dozen reasons to say no. Some are big and some are not. In the aggregate this is a NO vote in my book.
Denny
Your vote is yours to cast, and thanks for considering the aggregate. Good luck to us all!