Polling Data
 

DALPA shared the most recent polling data:

ALV Reductions

The most salient questions in the poll centered on management's desire to lower the ALV by up to 15% in exchange for a year of furlough protection. We asked if pilots found that acceptable. Only 10% of the respondents did. And for the finale, we needed to know which is more important to you, protecting all sections of the PWA or granting temporary relief preventing involuntary furloughs. Pilots indicated by more than two to one that protecting all sections of the PWA is more important, confirming the direct feedback you have been providing your LEC representatives and the MEC.

The Delta MEC relies on the support and direction of our brother and sisters. We are unequivocally committed to delivering your message to management: We are a union – we speak as one – and we will not negotiate any involuntary contractual relief. That will be our final word if management insists on seeking a zero-sum outcome. If management instead chooses to pursue solutions that are a win/win and benefit all parties, shareholders and employees alike, much like Spirit Airlines recently did, we are prepared to engage with them.

Those are the facts, and as always, we stand firmly on them. Thank you to those that took the time to complete the polling when you received the call. We stand shoulder-to- shoulder in unity, as we support all our pilots and protect the contract we have earned.

Wait!! Pilots don't trust management? We don't want concessions? Protect the PWA? Frankly, I'm shocked at these results.

I can’t wait to see JL spin that!

It's not really necessary, but I'd love to see the age/seniority breakdown on the 10% who'd support an ALV reduction.

OTOH, it would only be divisive. All in all, it was a good update letter.

My assumption is the 10% who support a 15% ALV reduction are mostly those in the group looking at a 100% ALV reduction. I’d also assume there are supporters outside of the 1941/2558.

As far as your age curiosity, you’re right, that data would strictly be divisive.

We already know the answer. The 10% are those facing furlough.

Maybe we can post that list with the 9% that opposed COBRA benefits for furloughees......

Maybe we can let anonymous polls and votes stay anonymous. Everybody won’t agree all the time and we all have our reasons for what we do.

exactly my point

Hopefully management will back off their hostage for concessions antics and focus on running an airline. We still have 900+ age 65 retirements by end of 2022 on top of the 1800 VEOPs. Needlessly furloughing will bite them in the ass with the training turmoil in both directions. Voluntary measures could help some of the staffing excesses in the short term.

My bad. Sarcasm filter from the “...” went down while I was typing. Apologies.

#240sux

lol. No worries!

Imagine a world with an LOA that allows the company to offer SILS of 1, 3, 6, 9, or 12 month duration for bid, in targeted categories. They offer them in the WB fleets where they’ve intimated the “targeted ALV reduction” would go, and possibly in fleets where they want to hold pilots without retraining. They’re worried about the take rate in those targeted fleets, but they ignore the fact that each month they hand out a bunch of short calls to reserves, they’ll have more takers the following month (and that is without the natural effect of pilots bidding for SILs just to have no obligation to the company). The LOA might even stipulate 45 day notice for CQ for SIL taking pilots, for additional pay for travel/CQ days, just to manage training for takers. While not for everyone, does anyone not think they could get pretty close to the targeted ALV reduction results?

The company gets what it wants: reduced costs in targeted categories and reduced training churn, plus the gratuitous evil chuckle that goes with handing out extraneous short calls each month. The union gets the satisfaction of voluntary measures and protects jobs.

Obviously it can’t work because it won’t tickle the sadist erogenous zones of RG and his hapless JL puppet, therefore it will never happen.

Who cares about the 10%. There has always been people, for whatever reason, who have always sided w/ management. No matter what the circumstances. The stats on this one are amazing. While 78% felt ALPA was doing everything correctly and that ALPA had 78% support it shows an amazing backing of NO ALV reductions, even for furlough protection.

I think this sends a very strong message to Delta. Stop trying to ask for ALV reductions. We all know that is jut a veiled pay cut. And that there are many voluntary programs to help mitigate further costs that Delta has ignored, since March! So we’ve spoken. No ALV cuts for anything. I’m sure there are many UNA’s who are part of the 90% that are against ALV cuts for NO furloughs. We’ve all seen it before. Some affected more than others in the last black swan event.

I’d say the Delta Air Lines Pilots are WOKE.

I know. It's almost like flight ops management has no memory of the past. Where were these guys during the Pan/Am debacle, Leadership 7.5, 9/11, or the bankruptcy?

I know. Either not in flight ops, or at a regional, or not here at all.

Exactly. Looking back all I can say is the poor move by JL to not offer Sils and how callously and quickly after the LOA was signed will go down as one of the biggest corporate blunders in Delta’s modern history. Too late now to walk any of that back. The stats paint a very clear picture of just where we stand.

Good job executives. You all get an F in labor management.

They could’ve dealt with all of this so differently. It’s apparently clear. You’ve all not learned a damn thing and continue to show how disconnected you all are.

How about a new pin or lanyard Alpa? DALPA Pilots #Woke

I agree completely. They haven’t even tried any voluntary measures. If they offered SIL’s of various lengths in each overstaffed catagory, and there weren’t enough takers to move the needle, I would understand, and be more receptive to an ALV reduction, but they haven’t even made an effort, so neither will I.

If they want to be positioned for a quick recovery, whenever that does happen, we need to have an abundance of pilots trained and ready to go in each catagory. If we cut to the bone, we will weather the storm better financially, but we will be scrambling for 2+ years to get caught up again, and miss out on a ton of revenue over those years. I’m still confident that at some point in the not too distant future...6 months to 2 years, where people will decide they’re no longer afraid of Covid, whether we achieve herd immunity or a safe, reliable vaccine becomes readily available, I have a feeling everyone is going to decide it’s time to travel again at about the same time, and we will immediately be woefully behind and be stuck playing catch up for years to come.

The best option to get through this difficult time, in my opinion, is voluntary SIL’s and if that’s not enough, an ALV reduction, while keeping each catagory overstaffed in the short term, to be ready to stand up our schedule quickly. I think this is what management wants too, but they’re using FUD to get more out of our contract before sharing their plan with us.

The more I try to understand what's happening the more my head hurts. You don't suppose management would deliberately lose out on possible revenue and employee trust, just to prove a point?

Apparently they would...

“Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead.”

Hopefully it’s works out as well as it did for Admiral Farragut

My understanding is that JL actually wanted SILs and it was EB that squashed it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

probably couldn’t sleep......

#die240die
#240doesntmatter
#240needstogo

Yeah... I would also agree, but JL peddled it. He’s complicit in it as well. Guilt by association.

agreed. Only way delta rebuilds trust starts with the removal of 3 people. They are pretty obvious.

Moe , Larry, and Curly?

I just see this all going down much differently under Captain Dixon... or at least he would’ve resigned in disgust.

Just as long as its not the Pep Boys.....Manny Moe and Jack! :)

Apparently you weren't around for Ron Allen's [aka BulletHead] Reign of Error [aka 7.5 & The Great Eastward Migration].

To answer your question: yes, yes they would.

I was called for the poll. At that time I was UNA facing furlough. I told them no, I do not support an ALV give to save furloughs. Protect the PWA - all of it.

Since the poll, we know that some of us UNAs were spared. I was given a lifeline from the VEOPers. Even if I wasn't I would still tell the MEC no gives on ALV, protect the PWA.

I'm glad they didn't reveal demographics. Could be problematic. However, I don't see us as a divisive group. I think JL and RG are hatchet men and they want some scalps. They are still holding brothers and sisters hostage. We need to push back on them hard. We'll get voluntary paid leave measures.

bravo.... bravo....

I heard from someone very high up this week the same thing. Flt Ops was dumbfounded by a flat rejection of SILs from the very top.

Sleepy, Grumpy and Laffy?

Here we go again. High ALVs are concessions, not lower ones.

Maybe DALPA could get us all some AFA pins.

Yeah, when there’s tons of flying to go around, higher ALVs are a give. When there’s no flying to go around and you’ve budgeted on min guarantee on the higher ALV you’d not like to see that come down. At this time lower ALVs are the give. It’s not one or the other for every situation possible.

fify. .

Well that's fine. I'll just take my 80 hour SIL instead of maybe taking a 55 hour one.

#240

Well remember their original plan was for a lower ALV and reserve pilots worked the same number of days. So a definite paycut (hours paid per day of work). Line holders did work less days though .

The only offer made public was an uneven ALV reduction of UP TO 15 hours (could be 0 or 1), applied non-uniformly across categories. It was also to sunset in a year. The only way that plays out is with the company minimizing expenditures and jobs; the corollary would be the optimizer we've all gotten to know and love. Any actual benefit of an across-the-board and/or permanent ALV reduction (more jobs, better long-term QOL) would be completely negated under that model.

Permanent, uniform ALV reduction is not on the table. It simply doesn't benefit management in a meaningful way and would hamstring them in the recovery. I'd vote for it if it were offered...but it won't be.

The ALV dilemma has many sides and I get where some of you say lower ALV’s lead to a better QOL. Only if our base pay was higher, ALV would have to be raised by as much to offset. Because a lower ALV w/ more green slips is not an improvement of QOL and actually a big hit to QOL.

But in this particular example of lowering ALV by 15% unevenly across various or all fleets is very insidious and would’ve lead to pay cuts out of seniority. You can’t allow the company the ability to cut one fleet’s hours (pay) over another... especially the minimum ALV (min rsv/min block hours). That would be unjust and go against seniority.

If anyone thinks that a lower ALV would somehow lead to more pilots on property or more green slips for those on the fleets accepted are purely delusional. Delta is only shopping for this option to save money. That means on those fleets that would see lower ALV’s there’s not going to be much flying anyways, which means those pilots would’ve just taken at least a 15% pay reduction.

Under our current system, there is nothing worthwhile of a lower ALV. And I guarantee you that our past has shown that we will fly higher ALV’s and cover w/ green slips. That save lots of money on the overall manning document and to try to ever get it back is a waste of time.