Originally Posted by
Gspeed
Of course they don't publish it. It is proprietary, highly coveted, and valuable. They will release it to certain company financial analyst personnel when in the course of assisting a represented pilot group's bargaining. Even then, they will only do so when it is protected by NDA. They obviously release it to union personnel that are assisting with the bargaining process as well.
If SWAPA wants access to those types of analyses then they must hire E&FA to do that work. The APA has done this frequently in the past. I assume that SWAPA has paid a third party to do some sort of contractual deep-dive cost analysis on your current contract and any requested changes. If they have, then you can attempt to get that data from SWAPA, though they likely won't let you have it without you signing an NDA.
All this goes to say is that your well-intentioned posts are basically based on "trust me bro" numbers. You think you're doing your pilot group a favor by "educating" them, but you're likely not. You're swaying them based on your assumptions and the numbers from suspicious and unreliable sources.
SWAPA should be communicating these types of things to your pilot group. If they aren't, then you possibly have bigger fish to fry.
.
You still haven’t explained why the data from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Airline Data Project is a “suspicious and unreliable” source. Again, maybe it is and maybe ALPA’s data is more accurate.
But it’s not like a project produced by MIT comes with a baked-in assumption of dodginess and inaccuracy. It goes without saying that MIT is one the world’s leading research universities. It has produced game changing technological innovations, is affiliated with 100 Nobel Prize laureates and has 10 Nobel Prize laureates as current faculty members.
Here are the
bio’s of the MIT folks behind the Airline Data Project. I don’t read those bio’s and think to myself, “Yes, these people clearly wouldn’t know what they’re talking about. They are as ‘suspicious and unreliable’ as all get out.” Do you?
So, again, I’ll ask, why is the MIT Airline Data Project considered “suspicious and unreliable”? Maybe it is. Maybe you know something that’s not immediately obvious or you have access to inside information that would establish why what you’re saying is, in fact, the case. If so, please post your evidence here. But, so far, you’re making a “Trust me bro” claim that you have yet to back up with anything but your own hearsay.
And, if you can establish that MIT’s information is “suspicious and unreliable,” I’d be happy to redo the one chart that I produced based on the MIT numbers that demonstrated the TFP rates that would be required to achieve a 30% premium over Delta. All of the other charts have been derived entirely from the official SWAPA and DALPA pay tables. Or are those pay tables also suspect?