Delta Mgmt requests mediator.
#181
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,465
Likes: 0
From: A330 First Officer
It should be mentioned that one of the main reasons this company is making this type of profit is that the pilot group, more than any other group, sacrificed first and much more than any other employee group.
Pay cuts
Work rules
Retirement
They came to us for “safe harbor” pay reduction to save this company.
Used the courts to bludgeon us.
Now they act like they don’t owe us anything?
Pay cuts
Work rules
Retirement
They came to us for “safe harbor” pay reduction to save this company.
Used the courts to bludgeon us.
Now they act like they don’t owe us anything?
757 rate 2004 - $267/hour
757 rate 2018 - $296/hour
so we've come a whole 11% almost 15 years
When we signed C2K in July 2001 a great year of profit was 1-2 billion but they could afford those rates.
#182
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,869
Likes: 188
#185
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Sailing is correct here.
I'm a strong union supporter, but this last year the communications from this MEC have been puzzling. Trying to get us riled up about a non scope violation with regards to Korean, trashing greenslips, weird, targeted polling, releasing the minimum balance plan grenade with no explanation, obsessively fighting skyhub, and now this 28 million number which is obviously BS with no context. Do they think we're dumb?
Even with all that being said, I think we'll get the contract that we deserve it just might take a bit of time. This pilot group is wise and we'll vote accordingly.
I'm a strong union supporter, but this last year the communications from this MEC have been puzzling. Trying to get us riled up about a non scope violation with regards to Korean, trashing greenslips, weird, targeted polling, releasing the minimum balance plan grenade with no explanation, obsessively fighting skyhub, and now this 28 million number which is obviously BS with no context. Do they think we're dumb?
Even with all that being said, I think we'll get the contract that we deserve it just might take a bit of time. This pilot group is wise and we'll vote accordingly.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 01-12-2020 at 05:28 AM.
#188
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,823
Likes: 168
From: window seat
Could that be because the economy in general, and the flying market in particular, promptly lost those profits and went into DEEP multi billion dollar per year losses industry wide for years? If that's what you're pointing out then that would be technically correct but incredibly obfuscating as its radically out of context within the same historical lens you're trying to view it through.
If our 5+B/yr profits dry up to not only zero, but multi Billion dollar per year losses year after year, then I'm sure any gains we're asking for would, in that hypothetical case, be "unreasonable". But that's not relevant and everyone knows it. Obviously if that were to happen, they would come for concessions and any mediator or arbitrator would not be on our side.
Had the events of 9-11, as well as the coincident recession that was starting anyway not happened, and they kept making say even a measly 1B/yr in profits all those years instead of hemorrhaging Billions per year, they could have "afforded" those rates. Very easily. The rates weren't even a rounding error amidst the flurry of back to back to back multi Billion dollar blunders made by management that have been well documented:
Buy high/sell low fuel hedges, buying 2 regionals for 2B each and writing one to zero and selling the other for 300M for rediculous terms to another regional, the poorly thought out Taj Mullin in Bos that gifted historical capacity to a ruthless cut throat competitor, smash and grab "retention bonuses", going all in on nearly a thousand RJ's thinking the backbone of the domestic network was flying the world 50 high cost seats at a time, and many, many others).
So what was the relevance in saying "they did not afford them for long" when that is contextually irrelevant?
If our 5+B/yr profits dry up to not only zero, but multi Billion dollar per year losses year after year, then I'm sure any gains we're asking for would, in that hypothetical case, be "unreasonable". But that's not relevant and everyone knows it. Obviously if that were to happen, they would come for concessions and any mediator or arbitrator would not be on our side.
Had the events of 9-11, as well as the coincident recession that was starting anyway not happened, and they kept making say even a measly 1B/yr in profits all those years instead of hemorrhaging Billions per year, they could have "afforded" those rates. Very easily. The rates weren't even a rounding error amidst the flurry of back to back to back multi Billion dollar blunders made by management that have been well documented:
Buy high/sell low fuel hedges, buying 2 regionals for 2B each and writing one to zero and selling the other for 300M for rediculous terms to another regional, the poorly thought out Taj Mullin in Bos that gifted historical capacity to a ruthless cut throat competitor, smash and grab "retention bonuses", going all in on nearly a thousand RJ's thinking the backbone of the domestic network was flying the world 50 high cost seats at a time, and many, many others).
So what was the relevance in saying "they did not afford them for long" when that is contextually irrelevant?
#189
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,465
Likes: 0
From: A330 First Officer
That is a fact and really in hindsight they should have never signed the contract, but they did. The economy was already headed south at the start of the year. Doesn't change the fact that we once had those payrates while making significantly less per year at the Big D. I don't want to kill the goose that lays the golden egg but it kinda gets old having a double standard here.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



