Originally Posted by BlaneO (Post 3134081)

I just watched Ed's townhall from today and was enfuriated by it. I should have counted how many he times he said that 40% of frontline employees took unpaid leaves, sacrificing themselves for the good of the company, and that now it's time for the pilots to step up. He's a finance officer and should know better than to spout such deceptive lies.



News flash... NONE of those employees were unpaid! My girlfriend is a 27-yr FA, and she's very savvy, but she actually SAVED money this summer while on her "unpaid leave" because of the NY unemployment and CARES money. The frontline employees that took "unpaid leave" were either made whole (or close enough to not feel real pain) by the government assistance programs. Delta essentially took the CARES money to cover employee costs, then turned around and sent 40% of their employees onto government programs (an employee-cost double dip).



There is no program to adequately replace a pilot's salary when they go on an "unpaid leave." The only option which has had any success in the industry is when the company itself steps up to fill that income gap, knowing that the government programs are insufficient. But that's a SIL, and Delta won't have it.



But comparing the 40% who "sacrificed" to save Delta to the 12% REAL earnings losses by pilots is a complete apples-to-oranges comparison, and Ed knows better. At least, I hope he does. His words were pure political spin that did not address the financial decisions he was advocating.

Originally Posted by AUP09 (Post 3134092)

Small point, but you should consider that many salaried employees also took (and are continuing to take) "unpaid" leaves and the unemployment programs did not adequately replace their lost wages.

Also consider that the percent of pay being lost by many non-pilot workers is much higher than 12%, even for those that received unemployment benefits for a period of time. If you want to compare year over year changes in total compensation, there are "regular" employees that will be down more than 40%.

Originally Posted by Scoop (Post 3134121)

All true but the OP is still 100% valid. Management has been falsely trying to paint the Pilots as both greedy and uncaring. We all know that we are in fact both greedy and caring. :D

Scoop

Originally Posted by 20Fathoms (Post 3134368)

Perhaps it’s time Ed took an unpaid leave. Sacrifice for the good of the company etc etc. And that includes stock and bonuses (his salary is a small portion of his total
compensation). Time to step up and lead by example.

Originally Posted by 20Fathoms (Post 3134368)

Perhaps it’s time Ed took an unpaid leave. Sacrifice for the good of the company etc etc. And that includes stock and bonuses (his salary is a small portion of his total
compensation). Time to step up and lead by example.

Originally Posted by GucciBoy (Post 3134383)

Would you follow his example if he did? Ed is good at his job and is not unskilled labor. That’s the distinction we are trying to make for ourselves. Ed is still being paid the vast majority of his compensation because the company needs him, and they can’t just go out tomorrow and hire someone better for the job. Same with us.

So while I think Ed is wrong to tell us to make the same “sacrifices” as some non-cons, telling him to do it isn’t the answer. Making him admit that we are closer to him than a baggage handler in the overall scheme of things is what we need.

Originally Posted by Ursula (Post 3134394)

I'm not sure how you conclude Ed's pay. He gave up his salary and his options if he has any are probably worthless because the strike price is too high. His RSUs are worth half what they were issued at, so his total compensation is down at least 50%. Meanwhile he's still working his hours. By that example you'd be flying an 80 hour line at 40 hour pay.

Originally Posted by GucciBoy (Post 3134383)

Making him admit that we are closer to him than a baggage handler in the overall scheme of things is what we need.

Originally Posted by BlaneO (Post 3134081)

I just watched Ed's townhall from today and was enfuriated by it.

Originally Posted by OOfff (Post 3134456)

Wait, pilots actually believe this?

Originally Posted by OOfff (Post 3134456)

Wait, pilots actually believe this?

Originally Posted by m3113n1a1 (Post 3134501)

The delusional egos of pilots. Flight attendants and gate agents have way more effect on Delta's success than us. You could replace us with thousands of other airline's pilots and no one would even notice! Replace the CEO and everyone would notice.

Originally Posted by GucciBoy (Post 3134525)

You’ve got it all wrong. On several points. First, pilots are closer to the CEO than they are to baggage handlers on a macro level. As in 12000-plus pilots as a group. On a micro level, sure, we are easily replaced by the next bubba in line. The difference there is Delta can hire any able-bodied person off the street and make them a baggage handler. To my knowledge, Delta has created zero pilots in their long history.

When you drop the humble act and acknowledge this fact, you realize that this is the distinction that makes it more realistic for a baggage handler to take an “unpaid” leave versus the pilot group or the CEO.

Originally Posted by GucciBoy (Post 3134525)

You’ve got it all wrong. On several points. First, pilots are closer to the CEO than they are to baggage handlers on a macro level. As in 12000-plus pilots as a group. On a micro level, sure, we are easily replaced by the next bubba in line. The difference there is Delta can hire any able-bodied person off the street and make them a baggage handler. To my knowledge, Delta has created zero pilots in their long history.

When you drop the humble act and acknowledge this fact, you realize that this is the distinction that makes it more realistic for a baggage handler to take an “unpaid” leave versus the pilot group or the CEO.

Originally Posted by m3113n1a1 (Post 3134501)

The delusional egos of pilots. Flight attendants and gate agents have way more effect on Delta's success than us. You could replace us with thousands of other airline's pilots and no one would even notice! Replace the CEO and everyone would notice.

Originally Posted by m3113n1a1 (Post 3134568)

You don't think Delta could hire able bodied people off the street and turn them into pilots too??

.

Originally Posted by m3113n1a1 (Post 3134568)

You don't think Delta could hire able bodied people off the street and turn them into pilots too??

Foreign carriers do it all the time. Delta is just going the cheaper route (for now) due to ample supply.

Originally Posted by m3113n1a1 (Post 3134568)

You don't think Delta could hire able bodied people off the street and turn them into pilots too??

Foreign carriers do it all the time. Delta is just going the cheaper route (for now) due to ample supply.

Originally Posted by askdanny (Post 3134493)

Relax. It's not worth it. Here's why management is applying a double standard between the pilots and the rest of Delta (if you understand that, their lack of straightforwardness won't be so maddening). It has one goal only: keeping other employee groups from organizing. That's it! It has nothing to do with sharing the pain or being team players. But they will paint it as is.

Originally Posted by MSP7ERB (Post 3135096)

What exact strings were attached to the CARES money? For the sake of argument, lets say Delta meet their buden by not forcing any layoffs and all those who wanted to stay employeed and get paid were able to do so. If that was the case and there was a billion of CARES money left over after the 6 month period, is Delta obligated to earmark that money or is the left over just gravy for Delta to use at their discretion? Not taking sides one way or the other but just trying to figure out what would happen to any money left over at the end of the 6 month period?

Originally Posted by EDVPLT (Post 3135118)

CARES money can only be used for Payroll and benefits. So if there is any money left over that will just continue to be used but only for the purpose of paying employees and their benefits.

Originally Posted by askdanny (Post 3135158)

My understanding is that in exchange for taking the CARES money, airlines committed to not furlough or cut pay until Oct. 1 (and continuation of certain air service, etc...). Implicitly the money is meant to help workers, so we assumed that CARES Act money only goes to payroll. But I don't think that's how it is spelled out in the law.

Originally Posted by EDVPLT (Post 3135118)

CARES money can only be used for Payroll and benefits. So if there is any money left over that will just continue to be used but only for the purpose of paying employees and their benefits.

Originally Posted by MSP7ERB (Post 3135171)

Thanks. A common question on recent Town Halls has been asking how much CARES $$ is left over. The sentimate behind the question seems to be an entitlement that any left over CARES $$ should be used to mitigage furloughes, but it sounds like the company is now allowed to furlough and use left over CARES money for payroll going forward. Again, not taking sides but just trying to figure out what the company is allowed and not allowed to do with left over CARES $$$.

Originally Posted by BlaneO (Post 3134081)

I just watched Ed's townhall from today and was enfuriated by it. I should have counted how many he times he said that 40% of frontline employees took unpaid leaves, sacrificing themselves for the good of the company, and that now it's time for the pilots to step up. He's a finance officer and should know better than to spout such deceptive lies.

News flash... NONE of those employees were unpaid! My girlfriend is a 27-yr FA, and she's very savvy, but she actually SAVED money this summer while on her "unpaid leave" because of the NY unemployment and CARES money. The frontline employees that took "unpaid leave" were either made whole (or close enough to not feel real pain) by the government assistance programs. Delta essentially took the CARES money to cover employee costs, then turned around and sent 40% of their employees onto government programs (an employee-cost double dip).

There is no program to adequately replace a pilot's salary when they go on an "unpaid leave." The only option which has had any success in the industry is when the company itself steps up to fill that income gap, knowing that the government programs are insufficient. But that's a SIL, and Delta won't have it.

But comparing the 40% who "sacrificed" to save Delta to the 12% REAL earnings losses by pilots is a complete apples-to-oranges comparison, and Ed knows better. At least, I hope he does. His words were pure political spin that did not address the financial decisions he was advocating.

Originally Posted by m3113n1a1 (Post 3134568)

You don't think Delta could hire able bodied people off the street and turn them into pilots too??

Foreign carriers do it all the time. Delta is just going the cheaper route (for now) due to ample supply.

Originally Posted by Ursula (Post 3134394)

I'm not sure how you conclude Ed's pay. He gave up his salary and his options if he has any are probably worthless because the strike price is too high. His RSUs are worth half what they were issued at, so his total compensation is down at least 50%. Meanwhile he's still working his hours. By that example you'd be flying an 80 hour line at 40 hour pay.