|
|
Originally Posted by nwaf16dude
(Post 1197223)
No, I am not happy with the pay rates either. Rumor I heard is that we could have had much more, but the company wanted 82 seaters in exchange, which would have led to three-class E-190s at DCI. Supposedly this is all we could get while keeping the limit at 76 seats. Best of two bad choices? I just don't really know. I don't like my choices.
|
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1197236)
Your rumor is correct. The company offered a larger raise for 82 seats.
|
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 1197229)
That is the rumor the company is spreading. It has zero validity unless we agree to it though. Scratch 82 and insert 100, 120, 150, 199, whatever. It was their fantasy opener they put in there to keep us on our heels and make us start negotiating with ourselves. As many predicted, they knew they wanted another large fleet of 90 seaters (with 76 seats installed by management choice) so they "opened" with 82 just to get us to go "phew, we held strong at only 76!" The fact that they even put that out there was incredibly hostile though. That single handedly could have ended the "constructive engagement" and the significant good will dividend they have been enjoying and they are very lucky we let it roll off our backs. This time.
|
Originally Posted by nwaf16dude
(Post 1197223)
No, I am not happy with the pay rates either. Rumor I heard is that we could have had much more, but the company wanted 82 seaters in exchange, which would have led to three-class E-190s at DCI. Supposedly this is all we could get while keeping the limit at 76 seats. Best of two bad choices? I just don't really know. I don't like my choices.
|
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1197240)
82 seats was not the companies opener. It was their counter when we countered with SW pay up front. By the way I am told the company opener was 3,3,3 for raises and yes they came up and yes we came down a lot more from our opener.
|
Originally Posted by Elvis90
(Post 1197152)
I think we can do better in pay & scope. The profit sharing cut bugs me, and I don't see any need to give 35% preferential hiring to ALPA DCI carriers.
For example, fast forward 8 years down the road. Delta is hiring like crazy to replace retirements along with other airlines (I know I know ... the elusive hiring boom). In a few years, the pool of available "well qualified" ALPA DCI pilots is exhausted. But the language forces the company to keep hiring ALPA DCI carrier pilots. Ultimately, the company is forced to hire from a pool of pilots who may not have be as qualified as pilots from another pool. Another example, what happens if the number of DCI carriers is reduced over time (bankruptcy, non-renewal of contracts). Then, 35% of pilots would be coming from a smaller pool of pilots which further cause qualified pilot shortages. Do we as a pilot group want this? Look, I know I was military trained and this isn't a military vs. regional rant. There are plenty of military pilots that shouldn't be working for DAL. I'd rather DAL be able to pick the best from ALL sources of pilots ... not forcing them to pick 35% from an ALPA DCI carrier. |
Originally Posted by DelDah Capt
(Post 1197208)
Well, I'm not sure you get my point, because in answer to your original question, yes, if I could somehow use 717s to improve scope, I'd do it.
So let me answer my own questions (in a condescending and pontificating way ;) ): 1) The purpose of our Scope clause should be to do everything to ensure that Delta pilots fly Delta passengers 2) From a Delta pilot's perspective, there is no difference between any of those passengers....they were all outsourced....don't care if it was on a big plane or a little plane. Either way, some of their ticket money went to somebody elses' pilot. This Scope makes it harder for Delta management to outsource a passenger. There are simply fewer seats for them to stash passenger butts on. Further, for the first time, this Scope demands that Delta pilots must do a certain percentage of the flying....and as 76 seaters are added (even though overall seats decline) the amount of contractual flying that we demand actually increases. its like the old loan is due in full thought process, i'm not saying we need to be unrealistic but theres no reason we should be giving up anything further in scope. Making scope stronger is great on the other points but we shouldnt need to give up my big rj's for it. ESPECIALLY with weak pay raises, cuts in PS, sick time program, and working reserves more etc |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1196918)
Highlighted in red. Read the TA. You obviously have not.
If you are junior, you are saying no to your captain's seat for a while longer. I don't care how you vote, I already have mine. It's up to you. No scare tactics... no spin. I read the agreement. It is a home run. I see a lot of target fixation on this board, and it is causing a LOT of myopia that leads to glaucoma which leads to blindness. The really sad thing is, it is preventable... Educate yourselves rather than firing before you aim. I think this is where the differences are coming from. We're all reading from the same text, we're just reading it differently. Call it a "home run" if you wish, but 5 LEC members said it was not only NOT a home run, but the TA does not honor the wishes of pilots as expressed by their surveys. Carl |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1196922)
Seems to me that we are going to be paid above everybody on the list. Including SWA.
YOUR pay metric won't necessarily be the same, and there ARE differences because of the DC contribution rates. But you have a full defined benefit plan... (probably not at 747 rates, and I guess it really must suck to have 330 rate to calculate it with...) There are many DAL pilots that will have more money in their pockets at the end of this agreement than will SWA pilots. It is a significant bite of the apple. The next dot on the scale.. which we will be able to start working toward as soon as the ink is dry on this one, will be the UPS 767 rates. And that will happen in less than 3 years. That is the dot that will keep you from leaving when you should. So keep encouraging all the junior guys to vote this down Carl. YOU have nothing to lose..... You have yours. Carl |
ding ding...there's a reason to go early and you don't need a TA to order 717's (a cheap used aircraft.)
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:00 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands