![]() |
Originally Posted by LandGreen2
(Post 3407472)
IMO truth is a subjective term in our culture. There is my truth, your truth, his truth and her truth. I agree that if stating fact one needs to provide The who, what, when and where...but not the why and how; those are opinions which only cloud the discussion unless specifically asked for
|
Originally Posted by bugman61
(Post 3407466)
This is incorrect. You are legal to keep flying in your previous category for the duration of your carry out trip.
|
Originally Posted by OOfff
(Post 3407522)
contract reference?
You won’t find a specific reference, but it’s true. Apparently an arbitration, or other grievance settlement from the past. If you don’t believe me, submit an ACE inquiry or talk to contact admin in the alpa office. They can of course take you off the trip at their discretion, but you are legal to complete the carry out trip. |
Originally Posted by LandGreen2
(Post 3407395)
I've always appreciated Sailing's contributions. Sure, it is sometimes hard to hear but his comments ring with wisdom and experience.
|
Originally Posted by theUpsideDown
(Post 3407569)
I mean- he's pretended and convinced himself he can see all possibilities. I'm afraid im not buying what hes been selling for years now.
|
My thoughts on this contract, Delta pilots should not lead the industry upward. As I have always said, during my entire time here, the company has only offered contracts when they desperately need something; cannot fill new hire classes, scope relief or a new CEO needs to calm Wall St that labor is ok. Believe it or not, none of these things are true at the moment although the SLI issue is a Trojan Horse.
The world needs 30,000 new airline pilots by 2025, they don't exist. It isn't even remotely plausible to entertain the idea of getting ahead of that wave at this point, with ATP requirements intact. IMO, it will be someone like Alaska, JBLU or even SWA that has to be the one that pushes the big rate upward. Their executive team will use "inflation" to sell the massive raise to the board members and Wall St. At that point the aforementioned airlines will be paying FOs more than DAL captains and that is Delta's worst-case scenario. A 40% raise for the pilots has got to be pretty close to a $1B annually. We are going to target 85% of the block hours we flew in 2019 yet we need the same number of pilots. Again, my .02, we have been over hiring. The hiring is front loading the seniority list while rates are low with pilots who are also accruing 200 pilots beneath them, per month. This movement will discourage those same pilots from wanting to start over with a seniority of ZERO elsewhere when one of those other carriers pops up as the industry leader in pay. The extra hiring is not wasteful, we are still retiring 500 a year for a decade. Make no mistake about it, the company is parking senior pilots NQAT and flying the doors off lower paid new hires. Our management team is always a step ahead. All that being said, it is why Delta should not lead the charge higher. If we take something ridiculous like 8%, representing 2019 to 2027 or whatever, we deserve it. It will also set the bar going forward, for the next half decade, that this is all the industry will cash out during the largest pilot shortage in history. Sure, other airlines may get raises that are significantly higher, but will an early 2022 hire give up 1000 to 1500 numbers to go chase the bottom elsewhere? Delta is banking on no, hopefully the difference is enough that junior says, see ya! |
Originally Posted by JustNarced
(Post 3407667)
My thoughts on this contract, Delta pilots should not lead the industry upward. As I have always said, during my entire time here, the company has only offered contracts when they desperately need something; cannot fill new hire classes, scope relief or a new CEO needs to calm Wall St that labor is ok. Believe it or not, none of these things are true at the moment although the SLI issue is a Trojan Horse.
The world needs 30,000 new airline pilots by 2025, they don't exist. It isn't even remotely plausible to entertain the idea of getting ahead of that wave at this point, with ATP requirements intact. IMO, it will be someone like Alaska, JBLU or even SWA that has to be the one that pushes the big rate upward. Their executive team will use "inflation" to sell the massive raise to the board members and Wall St. At that point the aforementioned airlines will be paying FOs more than DAL captains and that is Delta's worst-case scenario. A 40% raise for the pilots has got to be pretty close to a $1B annually. We are going to target 85% of the block hours we flew in 2019 yet we need the same number of pilots. Again, my .02, we have been over hiring. The hiring is front loading the seniority list while rates are low with pilots who are also accruing 200 pilots beneath them, per month. This movement will discourage those same pilots from wanting to start over with a seniority of ZERO elsewhere when one of those other carriers pops up as the industry leader in pay. The extra hiring is not wasteful, we are still retiring 500 a year for a decade. Make no mistake about it, the company is parking senior pilots NQAT and flying the doors off lower paid new hires. Our management team is always a step ahead. All that being said, it is why Delta should not lead the charge higher. If we take something ridiculous like 8%, representing 2019 to 2027 or whatever, we deserve it. It will also set the bar going forward, for the next half decade, that this is all the industry will cash out during the largest pilot shortage in history. Sure, other airlines may get raises that are significantly higher, but will an early 2022 hire give up 1000 to 1500 numbers to go chase the bottom elsewhere? Delta is banking on no, hopefully the difference is enough that junior says, see ya! I'm having difficulty finding the point of your post. First you say that Delta "should not" (as in, you don't WANT us to) lead the industry...then you follow that up later with "8% is ridiculous." Which is it? You don't want us to lead the industry, contract-wise, yet at the same time you are lamenting a theoretical insufficient pay raise? Which is it? What is the ideal end state goal in your mind? Then you mention the extreme pilot shortage, followed by "Delta has been over hiring" followed by "the extra hiring is not wasteful." Which is it? The very definition of "over hiring" is "wasteful." That's like saying "I overate at the buffet" followed by "but I didn't eat too much, it was actually a perfect amount of food." I think that the massive hiring is mostly good, but as we have all seen in this industry, this week's "massive hiring wave" can stop in an instant, followed by "the lost decade" and five years of furlough (though hopefully not!). |
Originally Posted by Herkflyr
(Post 3407695)
I'm having difficulty finding the point of your post.
Except that soon SWA FO rates will exceed our CA rates. I don't think its "negotiating in public" to say that won't happen.* *Wiemar hyperinflation notwithstanding I suppose, in theory. |
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 3407874)
Except that soon SWA FO rates will exceed our CA rates |
Originally Posted by JamesBond
(Post 3408142)
Is there a source somewhere for that?
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:19 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands