Delta Mgmt requests mediator.
#253
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,233
It is a laughable amount of improvements and walking away from the table after meetings schedule has been agreed on is a lousy thing to do by the company.
#254
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,233
We should ask for 300% increase and then settle down somewhere between 300% and 28 million!
#256
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2019
Posts: 414
#257
There is no retro for QOL and scope. Those are two major areas of the contract we are asking for gains. They need to kick the can past the summer before improving those areas otherwise the operation will collapse. The good news is that Delta is expecting us to have QOL improvements. If we were headed for productivity concessions, we would have a contract yesterday.
We're asking the company to fatten up a lean operation so we have the staffing required for better pilot QOL. If pilot hiring ever catches up and the 737 MAX returns to flying, we may have the necessary staffing for the QOL improvements we are seeking.
We're asking the company to fatten up a lean operation so we have the staffing required for better pilot QOL. If pilot hiring ever catches up and the 737 MAX returns to flying, we may have the necessary staffing for the QOL improvements we are seeking.
#258
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,522
There is no retro for QOL and scope. Those are two major areas of the contract we are asking for gains. They need to kick the can past the summer before improving those areas otherwise the operation will collapse. The good news is that Delta is expecting us to have QOL improvements.
So getting through just this summer doesn't seem like the reason. Also if its tue that they slid a POS section 23 across the table with even the smallest of concessions as some are saying, they may really think we're dumb enough (or can be bullied through the threat of lost TVM) to give them more prodctivity (aka QOL hits) to get whatever 6/3/3 they think we'll bite off on. Nope. QOL has to improve and much of it has to undo the QOL shredding optimizer "we didn't think they'd do that" hits that have occured since the last contract.
Now your other point about them simply pocketing their designed delay of QOL impovements is certainly valid. Those private islands aren't going to buy themelves.
#259
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Left seat of a little plane
Posts: 2,396
There's no doubt, but it's not "some" reason. It's the ridiculous, "let's give senior captains a large lump sum payment as they walk out the door" idea.
Or the company can drag their feet indefinitely and save $200K for every pilot that retires prior to an eventual agreement.
Given the large retirements ongoing, and scheduled to accelerate, now comes the inevitable "gee I can't imagine WHY the company would want to drag their feet."
What's amusing is the idea that all the upcoming retirements and associated training "crisis" somehow gave us lots of leverage. Even if true (and I am not buying it) the retirement proposal eviscerated that hypothetical leverage.
We're in for the long haul now. I'm glad we were wise enough to reject TA1, and also wise enough to ratify TA2.
Or the company can drag their feet indefinitely and save $200K for every pilot that retires prior to an eventual agreement.
Given the large retirements ongoing, and scheduled to accelerate, now comes the inevitable "gee I can't imagine WHY the company would want to drag their feet."
What's amusing is the idea that all the upcoming retirements and associated training "crisis" somehow gave us lots of leverage. Even if true (and I am not buying it) the retirement proposal eviscerated that hypothetical leverage.
We're in for the long haul now. I'm glad we were wise enough to reject TA1, and also wise enough to ratify TA2.
#260
There's no doubt, but it's not "some" reason. It's the ridiculous, "let's give senior captains a large lump sum payment as they walk out the door" idea.
Or the company can drag their feet indefinitely and save $200K for every pilot that retires prior to an eventual agreement.
Given the large retirements ongoing, and scheduled to accelerate, now comes the inevitable "gee I can't imagine WHY the company would want to drag their feet."
What's amusing is the idea that all the upcoming retirements and associated training "crisis" somehow gave us lots of leverage. Even if true (and I am not buying it) the retirement proposal eviscerated that hypothetical leverage.
We're in for the long haul now. I'm glad we were wise enough to reject TA1, and also wise enough to ratify TA2.
Or the company can drag their feet indefinitely and save $200K for every pilot that retires prior to an eventual agreement.
Given the large retirements ongoing, and scheduled to accelerate, now comes the inevitable "gee I can't imagine WHY the company would want to drag their feet."
What's amusing is the idea that all the upcoming retirements and associated training "crisis" somehow gave us lots of leverage. Even if true (and I am not buying it) the retirement proposal eviscerated that hypothetical leverage.
We're in for the long haul now. I'm glad we were wise enough to reject TA1, and also wise enough to ratify TA2.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post