Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-22-2012 | 01:08 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
From: A big one that looks like a little one
Hey and where's the fire with all of this anyway? It's May of 2012. At the earliest we wouldn't see a 717 in Delta paint until September of 2013. So why are we in a rush to put a contract in place on July 1, 2012? Something ain't right with these knee goat sheet odor boys.
05-22-2012 | 01:14 PM
Line Holder
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,281
Likes: 0
From: C560XL/XLS/XLS+
Listen up guys. If we vote this down, since it is a section six negotiation, the company cannot come back with a lesser deal. Very simple. The pay and retirement are an insult.
05-22-2012 | 01:16 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
From: 777 Sim Instructor
05-22-2012 | 01:39 PM
Line Holder
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
From: DAL 7ER FO
Actually, that's wrong. Part of the expedited negotiations was that nothing from them could be held against either party if we ever reverted to regular section 6 negotiations. So, we can't use this agreement as a starting point with the NMB. It will be like none of this ever happened. We start from square one again. Doesn't mean you should vote yes but something to keep in mind.
05-22-2012 | 01:42 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,898
Likes: 0
From: Stay THIRSTY, my friends!
It's being reported that SWA will lease us the 717's. A foregone conclusion? Don't paint 'em yet boys...
05-22-2012 | 02:04 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,357
Likes: 0
05-22-2012 | 02:29 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,105
Likes: 100
Company announced pay raises for non-contract employees.
Guess enough money was left on the table for that to happen.
Nu
Guess enough money was left on the table for that to happen.
Nu
05-22-2012 | 02:33 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
From: New Hire
Lots of great analysis here folks and I really appreciate it. Special shout out to tsquare who has had some great thoughts on this. I know, I know, hell just froze over.
I've been hesitant to post this because I didn’t want to jinx what I was really hoping would happen. But now what I was really hoping for has happened so here goes:
Negotiations that lead to an actual agreement (tentative or not) unmasks both sides’ real agendas. That is one of the vulnerabilities that both sides understand going in. Management has completely unmasked themselves by agreeing to this TA, and as such has provided us with tremendous leverage going forward. It is quite clear now that the “opportunity” that management sees is not a new aircraft order (that will be done based on the economics of the hull in question). It is also not a merger or asset acquisition, again because nothing in our current contract would prevent that. The “opportunity” that management is so desperate to grab ASAP is the removal of our current contract. And for once, the RLA and the NMB will work hugely to our advantage if we vote this TA down. Allow me to explain:
Our current contract has a hard cap of 255 over 50 seat RJ’s. Management says they can only get rid of those leases by getting more 76 seat RJ’s. This is of course wrong, because they can also be rid by bankruptcy…which will happen to the RJ airlines who continue to fly these 50 seaters. Bankruptcy will only be prevented if we increase our hard cap of 255 over 50 seat RJ’s. If we keep our current contract, the hard cap of 255 remains and RJ airlines go bankrupt allowing Delta to get out of the 50 seat leases that they were dumb enough to sign. What happens to that lift then? Delta will be forced to put over 50 seat RJ’s on those routes they still want flown. But what will replace those over 50 seat RJ’s? – mainline aircraft IF we keep our 255 hard cap. If we sign off on this new TA, there will be no incentive whatsoever by management to use mainline aircraft.
Our current contract allows for a much higher portion of profit sharing by pilots. Our very meager pay increases are actually being “funded” (the MEC’s words not mine) by the reduction in our profit sharing. By keeping our current contract, we will be very close to a wash on pay given the enormous profits that are in Delta’s future.
Keeping our current contract forces outsourcing to be reduced due to the reality of 50 seat RJ’s vanishing and our hard cap of 255 remaining. Keeping our current contract allows us to gain more in pay (my bet) through profit sharing. Keeping our current contract does not insert into our scope language the ridiculous new provision of the company being excused for damn near everything for things that are “out of their control”. We are the ones that need to drag our feet until management screams for relief…and they will scream for relief. Once they tire of sending out HUGE checks for profit sharing (that are indexed for inflation where multi-year pay raises are not), and paying for leases of parked 50 seat RJ’s, they will come begging. That’s when we can sit down and bargain.
Absolutely none of this is possible if we vote this TA in.
Carl
I've been hesitant to post this because I didn’t want to jinx what I was really hoping would happen. But now what I was really hoping for has happened so here goes:
Negotiations that lead to an actual agreement (tentative or not) unmasks both sides’ real agendas. That is one of the vulnerabilities that both sides understand going in. Management has completely unmasked themselves by agreeing to this TA, and as such has provided us with tremendous leverage going forward. It is quite clear now that the “opportunity” that management sees is not a new aircraft order (that will be done based on the economics of the hull in question). It is also not a merger or asset acquisition, again because nothing in our current contract would prevent that. The “opportunity” that management is so desperate to grab ASAP is the removal of our current contract. And for once, the RLA and the NMB will work hugely to our advantage if we vote this TA down. Allow me to explain:
Our current contract has a hard cap of 255 over 50 seat RJ’s. Management says they can only get rid of those leases by getting more 76 seat RJ’s. This is of course wrong, because they can also be rid by bankruptcy…which will happen to the RJ airlines who continue to fly these 50 seaters. Bankruptcy will only be prevented if we increase our hard cap of 255 over 50 seat RJ’s. If we keep our current contract, the hard cap of 255 remains and RJ airlines go bankrupt allowing Delta to get out of the 50 seat leases that they were dumb enough to sign. What happens to that lift then? Delta will be forced to put over 50 seat RJ’s on those routes they still want flown. But what will replace those over 50 seat RJ’s? – mainline aircraft IF we keep our 255 hard cap. If we sign off on this new TA, there will be no incentive whatsoever by management to use mainline aircraft.
Our current contract allows for a much higher portion of profit sharing by pilots. Our very meager pay increases are actually being “funded” (the MEC’s words not mine) by the reduction in our profit sharing. By keeping our current contract, we will be very close to a wash on pay given the enormous profits that are in Delta’s future.
Keeping our current contract forces outsourcing to be reduced due to the reality of 50 seat RJ’s vanishing and our hard cap of 255 remaining. Keeping our current contract allows us to gain more in pay (my bet) through profit sharing. Keeping our current contract does not insert into our scope language the ridiculous new provision of the company being excused for damn near everything for things that are “out of their control”. We are the ones that need to drag our feet until management screams for relief…and they will scream for relief. Once they tire of sending out HUGE checks for profit sharing (that are indexed for inflation where multi-year pay raises are not), and paying for leases of parked 50 seat RJ’s, they will come begging. That’s when we can sit down and bargain.
Absolutely none of this is possible if we vote this TA in.
Carl
05-22-2012 | 02:51 PM
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 829
Likes: 10
From: metal tube operator
If i am to sell this TA, i will make sure to let the 50+ group knows the significance of the term "time value", threatening them if we dont sign right now, it will be dragged out.
To the bottom guys, they will show us the carrots of new aircraft orders, saying the board wont authorize any deal until we have a TA. Again, if they want to buy crj900, we have the payscale to fly them.
To me, i think they kinda miss the mark in offering anything worth considering for the 40-50 group, the new Captain or senior FO range.
Its very dangerous for our group to present a vote that shows division. If this TA fails, it has to be by a big margin. Mgmt cannot be shown how the votes are tallied, so that they can target a specific audience to get to the magic 50%+1 votes needed.
To the bottom guys, they will show us the carrots of new aircraft orders, saying the board wont authorize any deal until we have a TA. Again, if they want to buy crj900, we have the payscale to fly them.
To me, i think they kinda miss the mark in offering anything worth considering for the 40-50 group, the new Captain or senior FO range.
Its very dangerous for our group to present a vote that shows division. If this TA fails, it has to be by a big margin. Mgmt cannot be shown how the votes are tallied, so that they can target a specific audience to get to the magic 50%+1 votes needed.
05-22-2012 | 03:18 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
