Originally Posted by newKnow (Post 1193711)

Sailing,

While I appreciate the fact that you are against this TA, I have to take this opportunity to point out that, so far, you have been correct about just about everything. But, in my book, there is a big difference between being correct about something and being right.

This post is yet another example of where while you might be proven to be correct when "another piece to this TA puzzle [is] announced before the vote," but if you are, something is very wrong here.

If you know that "something will be announced before the vote" now, why do you know this? If you are Delta management, then I understand your position. It's your job to play us for all you can. Good on you.

But, if you are a Delta pilot (union rep or not), you don't have any business being in the position where you know how the company will alter our voting process with future announcements. The totality of your posts don't pass the sniff test. What's going on?

Seriously, please explain. :confused:

Originally Posted by MoonShot (Post 1193771)

Per Diem is still very low for the places we go. You have to live pretty tight to get by on $50 in NYC on your 24 hour layover.

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 1193775)

Simple, I called my union and asked a lot of hard questions about the TA. I also informed them based on their answers I would be voting no. Call you rep and talk to them. How much would you like to bet I am both correct and right on this. The company has to know that there is little chance of this passing as written. I have no doubt the small narrow body order will be inked before we vote. It will have a clause making it contingent on contract ratification because they have to get out of the 50 seat leases with Bombardier. The only way that is going to happen is with a large aircraft order. It could include the C series or be a combination of the A319's and 900 from Bombardier.
Sometimes you simply need to think. How many rumors have been posted on here that make zero economic sense to the company in the last 3 years. Yet pilot after pilot bites on them here.
The company stated it was going to place a order for 100 large narrow bodies and 100 small narrow bodies. The small order is canceled with no real explanation. You think maybe the company was looking ahead to the contract? Think maybe they knew that a carrot was going to be needed?
At any rate you will not have to wait long to find out. It will happen in the next 4 weeks.

Originally Posted by scambo1 (Post 1193785)

What you are saying makes sense.

Why do WE the pilots of DAL have to PAY for this.

I really don't get it.

I have to walk away from this computer.

This whole episode makes me ashamed.

Bait and switch, penance for anothers sins, bailing a crack ho wife out of jail, defending a child molester...It's a violation on many levels. That's what this whole mess is.

Originally Posted by Going2Baja (Post 1193688)

AS entire scope is in 3 pages and doesn't mention rj seat size. I can email to you if you'd like.

Baja.

Originally Posted by Pineapple Guy (Post 1193739)

4. Guys hated profit sharing when we traded pay to get it. They said it will never pay off, it's subject to bean counter manipulation, etc. They said SHOW ME THE MONEY. Now, ALPA negotiates a "modest" decrease in profit sharing, while still maintaining the top bracket (20% of all income above $2.5B goes to the employees -- think if AAPL had that!), and you're complaining.

Originally Posted by Pineapple Guy (Post 1193739)

I've stuck (more or less) to my New Year's resolution to stay off this board, as it was sucking the life out of me. And I don't really intend to change that, but I couldn't help but notice the incredible hypocrisy and double talk coming from many on here. Consider the following:

1. Guys like Carl complained at the time of the merger, that even though hourly rates went up, his pay went down because of the low reserve guarantee. Now that's been fixed, and guys are whining. For a guy currently on reserve and getting 70 hours of pay, moving the guarantee to 80 (assuming an 82 ALV), coupled with the contractual pay raises results in a 29% increase in W2 on 1/1/13! Not too shabby.

You forgot to add, they have one MORE day of short call and now can be flown ALV +15. That's easy math right there, if I work more, I'll make more......

2. ALPA used to say DCI wasn't a big factor because they were only 15% of total ASMs. Guys on this board lambasted that and said its all about block hours; ASMs are irrelevant. Now, ALPA substantially increases the block hour ratio, grounding several hundred DCI jets, and guys say that doesn't matter; it's all about size. So which is it?
It shouldn't be an either/or. I believe the sentiment was "not one more seat/pound/aircraft" under the new section 1.

3. Guys wanted SWA pay on day 1. This contract achieves that, when factoring in the differential DC contributions.

SWA pay is more than an hourly rate. Let's compare equivalent W-2's.

4. Guys hated profit sharing when we traded pay to get it. They said it will never pay off, it's subject to bean counter manipulation, etc. They said SHOW ME THE MONEY. Now, ALPA negotiates a "modest" decrease in profit sharing, while still maintaining the top bracket (20% of all income above $2.5B goes to the employees -- think if AAPL had that!), and you're complaining.

We didn't "TRADE" pay to get it, our pay was taken away under the threat of an 1113c contract, it was a "bone" thrown by the company.

5. Lastly, and most importantly, if you want to know why our "team" of professional airline pilots are not winning this game, look at your teammates. Every time Delta ALPA comes up to bat, we hit a single. Not sexy, the crowd doesn't go wild, but we hit a single and get on base.

You have the right analogy/strategy except you forgot ONE small part. Small ball (multiple singles, etc) does WIN ball games, BUT you have to get a runner across the plate to put a run on the board. Stranding men of base does NOTHING.