Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,876
Likes: 193
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.
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.

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.
How is it not a concession to say RAH was violating the spirit of section 1 and then carve out an exception for them to continue?
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,530
Likes: 0
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.
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.
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.
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,058
Likes: 2
From: Capt
Deleted with prejudice
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,562
Likes: 106
From: Road construction signholder
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.
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.
Vote NO and be done with it.
Also, sometimes this week's anger is next weeks forgotten afterthought. You cannot even find a negative mention of our C2K on these boards any more. It is held up as an exalted contract that sets the standard for all hopeful future contracts.
And yet, I can remember when it was approved by the membership back in 2000 or early 2001, I had a fellow pilot on the crew bus telling me how he was going to "quit the union" because the contract was "so concessionary." Nothing I tried to tell him would dissuade him from his opinion at the time. Looking back, I am guessing he probably thinks a bit differently now.
That said, absent some info that I haven't discovered yet, I can't see voting for this TA. We could have done better, and should have. I especially hate the "you might get new airplanes" sales pitch. Let's face it. Ultimately, management will buy or not buy the planes they need to run this airline. A TA shouldn't need ratification to lock in our management's business strategy. More carrot and stick BS.
Banned
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 793
Likes: 0
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.
As the resident graphic designer, would it be possible for you to gen up a flow chart showing the scope tradeoffs? IOW how many large "regional" jets can come online at any given time, and in conjunction with the removal of how many 50 seaters... how many 717s do we have to actually see in DAL livery before the company can buy any large "regional" jets? It will be a tough assignment. Probably harder than making sense of an insurance policy... But you seem to have a good handle on the graphic stuff needed. Possible?
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
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.
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.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post




