Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-22-2012 | 07:51 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
From: Right Seat 744
A question for all the Delta guys (and gals) out there-
As a Continental Pilot, we had our "openers" published to the line pilots a few years back.. before the merger (of equals~ LOL).
Point is, we knew what the Union was putting on the table- for right or wrong.
Did you guys not have any idea what your NC was shooting for? Cause, it seems from reading all the posts about your TA .. that everyone is surprised and disgusted.
I'm just confused at how this could even go down like it has?!
Plus, when my CEO is touting your TA, and I can see all the holes in it.. I'm worried.
Hope your Pilot Group can/will hold the line. Seems as if your NC and most of your MEC can't.
Good Luck
Motch
As a Continental Pilot, we had our "openers" published to the line pilots a few years back.. before the merger (of equals~ LOL).
Point is, we knew what the Union was putting on the table- for right or wrong.
Did you guys not have any idea what your NC was shooting for? Cause, it seems from reading all the posts about your TA .. that everyone is surprised and disgusted.
I'm just confused at how this could even go down like it has?!
Plus, when my CEO is touting your TA, and I can see all the holes in it.. I'm worried.
Hope your Pilot Group can/will hold the line. Seems as if your NC and most of your MEC can't.
Good Luck
Motch
05-22-2012 | 07:58 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
From: 7ER Capt
I told my rep I needed 4 things (at a minimum) to entertain a yes vote:
1 scope = nope
2 pay = nope
3 sick leave = yep
4 min calendar day = nope
I guess one out three isn't bad?
Two thoughts:
1 If we approve this, we have indicated to Mgmt that this is our new post BK baseline...i.e., this is section 6, not an LOA/MOU...not good.
2 If Smisek is happy about this, that can not be a good sign
.
Seriously, it is apparent from myself and all those I have flown with, that the DTW, MSP & AA guys are right...the negotiators have not followed our survey requirements. Very easy no vote for me.
1 scope = nope
2 pay = nope
3 sick leave = yep
4 min calendar day = nope
I guess one out three isn't bad?
Two thoughts:
1 If we approve this, we have indicated to Mgmt that this is our new post BK baseline...i.e., this is section 6, not an LOA/MOU...not good.
2 If Smisek is happy about this, that can not be a good sign
.Seriously, it is apparent from myself and all those I have flown with, that the DTW, MSP & AA guys are right...the negotiators have not followed our survey requirements. Very easy no vote for me.
05-22-2012 | 07:59 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
RA just announced 10% profit sharing for everyone, Leasing 88 717's, pay raises for non- contract employees and increasing the number of 76 seaters per the TA. Guess he is sure it will pass.
05-22-2012 | 07:59 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
I don't care how many 19 seat turboprops or 50 seat RJ's the company operates. I do care how many 76 seat jets they operate because those take away mainline pilot jobs. The total number of RJ's is reduced, who cares! No more 76 seat jets at DCI.
05-22-2012 | 08:00 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
From: No to large RJs
I thought you were voting against this POS. Why try to sell it? The number of 76 seat jets dramatically increase under this TA. That is a mainline jet. It doesn't feed, it replaces mainline flying. We could outsource the 88 and below flying and it also would dramatically decrease the number of RJs. That would be a colossal failure of scope, just as this POS does with large 76 seat jets. Here is a novel idea.....we fly them. The cost can be contained just as easy here as outsourcing the jets. It is not about cost but power and the weakening of our bargaining position. It serves both the company and ALPA. We will control less and less of the flying. Cracking down on scope would cause huge problems for ALPA if we were successful. We are being marginalized and you are advocating for it to continue.
05-22-2012 | 08:01 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
From: M88 B
The 4:30 a day was a improvement over the current contract. Nothing was given up in the other rigs to get it. They approved it because it was the best deal the company was willing to make. The one thing the company really hates is credit. Every item was a cost item. The company offered a larger pay raise however only if some of the other TA'd sections were changed more in their favor. There was a dollar value the company placed on getting a quick contract. I posted on here months ago that I did not expect a TA from the fast track because the company would not be willing to put up enough money to make it happen on a fast track basis. I was only wrong because the MEC accepted the TA. The TA is worth 400 million a year. The guys directly involved in the process believe they got all the company was willing to give to get it done now.
The company still enjoys about 1.2 billion a year in cost savings from LOA 46 and the 1113 contract. The solution is simple. Vote it down and we can enter the traditional process. Let the company know loud and clear your feelings on the contract. Take the time to walk in and speak with your CP. Send a email to Steve Dickson.
The company still enjoys about 1.2 billion a year in cost savings from LOA 46 and the 1113 contract. The solution is simple. Vote it down and we can enter the traditional process. Let the company know loud and clear your feelings on the contract. Take the time to walk in and speak with your CP. Send a email to Steve Dickson.
Sailing, Thank you for putting a dollar figure to this. I personally see NO benefit to vote yes on this. Status quo is better than allowing the company to rush us into more 76 seat jets. If we step back and vote NO on this what is really going ot get worse? My feeling is the company will still get the 717/319 and will bring them in anyway (hard to pass up a good deal on planes that are needed to replace aging aircraft). The 50 seaters will still go away at the end of this all.
The company will make Billions over the next few years (therefore, the upside is 15% vs. a lowered 10%).
Unfortunately for DALPA I believe all this TA did was to anger the pilots. The result could very well lead to the END of ALPA at Delta. I see the influence of ALPA National all over this TA and it reeks of outside influence. More large RJ's to protect the regionals as they lose small RJ's due to market conditions, 35% requirement on hiring DCI, Etc.
What i cannot find is what was done regarding large turboprops?
05-22-2012 | 08:01 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
Scambo, Those are great ideas but in the real world not a reality. I think at first reading we can do better in some areas then current TA but as always there is risk involved. In 3 years we could be negotiating a new contract from a 20% higher base, then your suggested pay rates would not be unreasonable or we could still be negotiating this TA and your rates would still be considered unreasonable by the NMB. Who knows ? There is always risk involved, ask the AA guys about the contract they turned down early Sep. 2011. Still unsure of my vote but leaning no.
I agree that in 3 years ... In 3 years I could be dead, in 3 years a comet could smash into the earth...
My suggested payrates and other contract aspects are not only reasonable, they are do-able. Maybe just not with this pilot group and obviously not with this MEC.
I just don't see any reason to have a CB Agent or a NC or any union anything if this is what is brought. The time for being all agreeable and sweet is over, just like the company wants it.
05-22-2012 | 08:02 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,530
Likes: 0
Where does it say in the TA that any 717s that come our way do not come with pilots?
05-22-2012 | 08:05 AM
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
What is all this talk of a "secret" or "incentive" being held back from us that certain posters have discussed. This concerns me that there are people who are withholding information to drop out there close to ratification to possibly sway us, and that poster(slowgame? Or something, sounded like it was the union holding this info back)...
05-22-2012 | 08:05 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
