Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1198773)

How would any of us know? You have yet to tell it.

The LEC reps didn't misread or mishear. You're lying. The TA is cost neutral to the company. We all have waited a decade for DALPA to show us what they can do with a Section 6. DALPA fell into incredible luck to enter Section 6 with a massively profitable company. What did DALPA bring us? A cost neutral TA.

Carl - dealing out the truth

Originally Posted by flyallnite (Post 1198819)

That's another big myth about this TA that is being sold to us. Mark my words, this thing passes and you'll see a big displacement bid at the end of the summer. Here's why:

The company loooves to staff with displacements... we've seen that already. The 717's will be filled with displaced captains off the DC-9 and MD-88's due to aircraft retirements and the increased productivity that the TA provides. The 757's and some 767's will start to be replaced with the new, lower paying 737-900ER, also filled with displaced 767 crews... why do you think they haven't bothered to convert the rest of the 767 domestic category to ER? Because it's a waste of time and money!

The early retirement scheme sounds great right? All that movement off the top will really pull us up the list... not so fast!

If you read the language, the program terminates as soon as ANY ONE CATEGORY reaches critical staffing levels. Guess what? That language is there for a reason. Right now, the 747 is overstaffed. They will allow maybe 100 high paid guys off of that thing and then the whole program stops for good. No replacements needed. Not for another few years actually as Alaska grows and the new fleet of 76 seat replacement jets come online. So don't start practicing those Captain PA's just yet...

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 1199078)

1234 is a North guy, for what it's worth.

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1199083)

Then how will the block hour ratios be maintained? Will the company just ignore them? WE have to increase to 1.56 of DCI if they get all 223 76s, so those hours have to come from somewhere. True.. there might be displacements, but the ratios are our ace in the hole that PROTECT JOBS. My math says that if DCI increases by 10% with each group of 76s that they get, when all 223 are on board, they will have increased their block hours about 77%. Ours will have to increase by 156%. Or you can ignore the math and remain ****ed about a few airplanes...


We cannot do anything about the stupid payscales, because Carl has to be the king of the swamp... and we all know just how much harder he works and how much the airplane that he (apparently) bought is making for the company... yada yada yada...

Originally Posted by newKnow (Post 1199076)

Another unnecessary NWA reference? Do they ever stop? :confused:

Originally Posted by newKnow (Post 1199084)

I picked up on that from his post. I don't discriminate in telling anyone that the North vs. South thing should be dead when it comes to this TA.

I'm tired of looking up what our pay rates were back then, or how many days we had off, or what was going to happen to the DC-9's. At NWA, we didn't really have long call or short call days. So what? Two weeks ago, I did. Does that mean I should just be that much more grateful?

We are all starting from the same point. If we really want to rehash who had what, we should do it after the TA is figured out, because IMO it's an unnecessary distraction.

Originally Posted by newKnow (Post 1199084)

I picked up on that from his post. I don't discriminate in telling anyone that the North vs. South thing should be dead when it comes to this TA.

I'm tired of looking up what our pay rates were back then, or how many days we had off, or what was going to happen to the DC-9's. At NWA, we didn't really have long call or short call days. So what? Two weeks ago, I did. Does that mean I should just be that much more grateful?

We are all starting from the same point. If we really want to rehash who had what, we should do it after the TA is figured out, because IMO it's an unnecessary distraction.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1198975)

I'm a bad example for you to use, because I have almost no DC and will not til around 2015 if memory serves. We did that at NWA so junior guys would have their retirements boosted by money from senior guys that I theoretically don't need as much since I have a frozen DB retirement.

But my point about this TA being cost neutral is that if you're going to crow about these pay raises (which are really little more than a COLA), you MUST look in the rest of the contract where that is being "funded." Loss of profit sharing, concessions on work rules to name a few. That's only fair to point out. Especially in the light that this TA is indeed cost neutral to Delta. We waited 10+ years and gave DALPA what they pleaded for...the opportunity to show us what they could do in the first Section 6 in a decade. DALPA was further bolstered by negotiating during a time of our airline's record profits. What did they bring us? A cost neutral TA.

That's a fact. Everyone must obviously use their own judgment on how to vote, but you're voting on a cost neutral TA.

Carl

Originally Posted by scambo1 (Post 1199020)

A vote to outsource 70 more 76 seat jets is a vote to outsource 2 more Compass sized airlines...or its also a vote to outsource 35 737-800s (based on size and economics).