You know what would be better than all of that? I get assigned a trip. It involves a deadhead or four. I arrive at the gate, swipe my badge, and walk down to my comfort+ or better seat that isn’t in the middle and continue on my way. No need to add my name or stress already stressed agents about adding my name. You can act like it’s no big deal, but the fact is it is an unnecessary waste of time, and should be taken care of. I’m sure a tiger team of IT professionals can handle it.

 

Just keep proving my point. Please just let us work on negotiating for DH language. You can read about it in D1 on your international DH.

 

If the clumsy, inefficient U.S. government can implement COLA among the varied departments and agencies, surely an air line can. Inflation-protected pay scales for beyond amendable dates -- if the U.S. Treasury can create and sell TIPS, surely an air line can adjust simple pay tables.

Now THAT would be industry leading.

A5S

 

We better get close or no one is going to vote for it. We aren’t United.

 

Along with preboarding with the working crew if you’d like, as is standard everywhere else.

 

The whole point of this thread was to examine a reasonable intersection of the imperative (inflation) and real contractual gains. The 29.9% really shows how injurious it is for our careers to go years without a raise. The imperative puts us in a position where we must choose between modest and marginal real gains or to extend further into the future hoping to defeat time value/inflation degradation. That tactic, along with full retro, paints us into a corner where the total package cost exceeds what any rational CEO/BOD can sign off on.

My analysis says we are now playing for maybe 1.5% real annual gains for a short duration contract. Another year from now with 5% plus inflation, then we’re talking treading water or more likely going backwards. If anyone expects Delta Airlines will sign a 40% plus contract, it would be best now to check out of this process in order to save yourself a lot of time and heartache.

Let’s say I’m right about the marginal (1.5%) upside cap for a 2 years duration. What could we have signed for in the summer of 2019? As a refresher, 1.4, 7, 8.6, 5.6, 5.6, 1.5, 1.5 represent inflation during the negotiating period, projected inflation for 2 years, and real gains for the 2 year duration. Compounded total gain is 35.4% for an annual compounding rate of 6.2%. Now the important question:

Would Delta Airlines have signed off on a 2 year contract for 12.9% at our amendable date? Better question is whether the pilots could have ratified such an agreement? I bet the answer is Yes to the first part and No to second part. Those numbers are assuming a contract effective the amendable date. We actually signed a couple of contracts 6 months early. The number becomes 16.2% if we sign in the summer before the amendable date, 3 months after exchange of openers.

The point I want to make is that there was no imperative at the beginning of the process to wrap it up by the amendable date. No cognizance of the toxic effects of inflation and time value. Opportunity was squandered and now we pay the price.

 

A more realistic look at the summer of 2019 would show that the previous 2 year inflation rate was 2% compounded. Add a 1.5% real return to that rate for a 2.5 year contract (duration 2 years, signed 6 months early) and you get a 2 year deal at annual compounding rate of 4% for 13.9%.

Would management have signed off on that? What about the pilots? The hard truth is that our current situation requires more than 16% a year to deliver the same 2 year real rate of return that 4% would have in the summer of 2019.

 

if available at the time of booking. So no, upgrades are not a factor. Also I think they went ahead of revenue upgrades even before this change.

I think If they get a middle seat assigned they also have the option to not take the flight if they do not want. I’m not sure 100% but the way a UA guy explained it to me was if they don’t get an economy plus aisle or window seat they don’t have to take the flight. I could be wrong on this part though.

 

Let’s extrapolate a real 1.5% gain in value over a 30 year career. This would yield a 56.3% total real return over a career. Your purchasing power would increase over half. With inflation, let’s say 3% annualized over 30 years, the value of the contract would increase 379%.

As I said, a little real return goes a very long way during the duration of a career. Let’s say you only get half of the real return you hoped for, say .75%. A 30 year career would yield 25.1% real return or a 248% increase with 3% inflation. This performance would absolutely destroy any performance seen in the industry.

Would the company sign off on a perpetual .75% real raise? Maybe 30 years ago. Today, no way. We have shown them that we insist on much less. In fact we insist on a negative real return. COLA will never happen for this reason. This doesn’t mean they wouldn’t sign off on a small real increase contract to contract. They would jump at the opportunity.

Would the company have signed off in 2020 a 2 year deal for 2.75% (inflation running 2% at the time) increase in contractual value? All day long. What happened? Inflation was 1.4% in 2020, a real return for us of 1.35%. In 2021 inflation was 7%, a real return for us of -4.25%. Inflation total over the contract would have been 8.5% and our contract increase would have been 5.6%, a 2.9% loss in value. Minimal damage over a short timeframe.

Our negotiating tactics are unsound and no longer serve us in any material way. We need to elect reps and direct them to get contracts on time or early. In times of substantial profitability, we need a real return commensurate with profitability. In times of steep losses we need to abandon the belief we will get a real increase. In times of neutral profitability or losses we need to push for inflation adjustment, understanding that a threat in solvency will dictate real losses in contractual value.

The highest priority should be a new contract at the amenable date. Any real return we have at the table should be TAd in favor of continuing past the amendable date in an attempt to capture more gain. This approach produces modest nominal annual gains (assuming low inflation), something corporate America supports. During high inflation, corporate America supports higher annual increases, but with a lag. That lag is the killer and is why most don’t make any ground during inflationary periods and instead go backwards. Any real advances in value would outperform most others in our economy as evidenced by the dead flat performance of real wages over the last 40 years.

 

This completely ignores the RLA and the complete control management has over the timeline via willingness to add value. Unless there is a compelling reason to agree management will always stall. They drag their feet during good times and agree to nominal deals during slow economic growth. During times when the business is in peril, they extract anything and everything they can as an opportunity of crisis. This attitude is completely flawed. The only way to accomplish what you seek is to have a bridge escalator for post amendable date pay increases. If they will not agree to that, their is no hope for on time because the deadline is not enforceable.