Airline Pilot Central Forums - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)

- - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/36912-any-latest-greatest-about-delta.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by alfaromeo (Post 1206530)

Excellent, well spoken. I am sorry that I am trying to get people to look at facts and reality. It is much better when we try to live in a little fantasy world.

If you provided some con arguments with the full picture then people would find your facts more compelling. When you leave out facts then there is little point in listening.

And I'd recommend leaving out the following adjectives when describing others on this board:

"childish"
"emotional"
"silly"
"comical"
"sad"
"scared"
"fearful"
"hand-wringing"
"chicken"
"whiney"

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1206535)

Still ain't gonna make me vote no though... sorry. A merger is gonna happen with or without us. I prefer to be paid a little up front, and a little when it happens. But apparently that's just me.

And that is not a bad strategy. I think we all agree that a merger is in our near future.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ragtop Day (Post 1206538)

The more I think about the DPJ concession, the more it bothers me. DPJ is essentially a charter provider. Delta flies a bunch of charters. They are in competition for some of our flying. I realize a GV is a different animal than a 757, but Delta is activly trying to promote DPJ to our HVC's. Delta is marketing a traveling package, not just an airline. This cutout looks an a lot like the famous "camels nose". We fly a bunch of 319's on exclusive NBA/NHL charters. Those don't weigh all that much more than 100,000lbs and there's only a handful. I am sure management would love to transfer those aircraft to the DPJ banner. I flew a MLB charter and the coordinator could not stop talkin about the profit center the charter department is. Imagine how much more the company could make if they could outsource this flying. After all, we work for an airline, we wanted to get away from this type of flying. (insert mad face) This is not a vengeful management team. They did not put this clause in there to punish ALPA for the grivence They revisited this because they see there is money to be made.

Yep. There is a reason behind everything management wants. And what isn't being said about those items is as important as what is being said about our "gains."

We are letting the nose into the tent with this carve out.

Haven't we always been told that work rule changes and scope are impossible to get back?? I seem to remember an alpa pub exclaiming the preservation of some work rules and/or scope during bankruptcy..

Quote:

Originally Posted by cni187 (Post 1206489)

So if the TA is denied and we enter section six, our rates stay the same from 2012 to 2013 and beyond?

Yes.

And the superior work rules, GS opportunities, profit sharing etc. we currently have vs. the TA also stay the same.

As does the large RJ cap.

All fine with me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ragtop Day (Post 1206538)

Agreed. Instead of writing this off as "a joke" (alfaromeo) because its only x number of jets (btw outsourcing is always just x number more jets...."only a few more" turns into a bunch of flying). If it is such a small deal as alfaromeo says then it should be really easy to make all delta corporate pilot positions available to Delta Air Line pilots as well right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 1206526)

Remember ... our MEC Admin and ALPA President believe outsourcing is good, because Delta pilots share in the profits of outsourcing our labor. Once you understand that truth, then you understand their actions.

This is such a fundamental truth, that you'll not be able to understand the actions of management/DALPA without first understanding this.

Carl

Quote:

Originally Posted by finis72 (Post 1206481)

Elvis, I thought you were above that. How about a well thought out rebuttal like ACL and 80 gave(I don't agree with them,DL will not come back to the table and if they do it will be worse). Their posts were worth my time.

Fwiw voting up or down a TA is part of the process, the ALPA process, which I fully support period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by elvis90 (Post 1206539)

if you provided some con arguments with the full picture then people would find your facts more compelling. When you leave out facts then there is little point is listening.

this ^^^^^

Quote:

Originally Posted by alfaromeo (Post 1206527)

First, you can't code share with an alliance, an alliance has no code. You can code with other airlines. We have no restrictions on Jet Blue or Spirit or Virgin America doing a code share with Lufthansa either. What is special about Frontier that you want to restrict them from doing a code share? They can't carry Delta passengers and Delta has exclusive rights for code sharing in the US with AF/KLM. So you still don't answer the question, what does this have to do with your career at Delta?

Semantic. We need to have it in writing that we are the only US carrier for whatever alliance we are part of. That fixes all of it.

Quote:

Okay, what scenarios for a profit loss agreement does it not cover?

I already told you. I know my concerns are not along the lines of traditional JV's but they are possible.

Quote:

It is comical because we are talking about 5 business jets that have 19 passengers or less. When was the last time that Delta flew an airplane that had 19 passenger seats in it? The 40's? I am sorry, this is a joke.

Really? Ones that the MEC if,Ed a grievance over but never publicly showed a resolution are now a joke? That may be a quote some use to show the disconnect.

Quote:

Okay so you are worried that we can grow a lot and then shrink, but we have to be larger than we are today. Under today's protections we can just shrink right off the bat. How is that better?

Correct And it's a long term problem, one we may have to expend precious leverage for later. Growth is good but not having protections to keep it?, not so good.

Quote:

So hiring will come six months later than under this TA, why is that good?

It may be good, but is it good enough with the quids? That is the truer question.

Quote:

Let's be honest, 40 growth mainline, 70 more large RJ's, 218 less 50 seaters, no turboprop exceptions. 40 more mainline, 148 less DCI.

Your answer had nothing to do with displacements. You hint that this TA will somehow accelerate displacements and then you talk about furlough protection. Our furlough protection is much stronger on the TA.

It will accelerate displacements and more so if we do not get a target level retirements.

On furlough protection it's better but we already have protections that make the roi too far away.

Quote:

Debunking. Reserves have to average 60 hours. Currently only 5% of reserves make it to 70 hours. How are guys going to average more than 60? Please give me the definition of average and then show the math how they exceed that average.

How long is the reserves required forumula average?
They can initially and it's more about being on the hook for days where now we are freefrom obligation after flying within two hrs of alv.

Quote:

Okay, without the recovery option, they get no pay and then they have to pick up open time to get paid. With the recovery option, they get paid, and then they can be assigned open time. How is guaranteeing a guy's pay a concession. This is a gain, no matter how you try to spin it. By the way, this affects about 50 guys a month.

It takes time away from logical line holders and eventually gs's

Quote:

SWA will be below us in January 1, 2013 when you consider the DC plan. Please do not try to spin me that the DC doesn't count. We have decided to convert some pay to DC, if we put it all back into pay is our compensation changed at all? AF/KLM/BA, are you kidding me? Seriously, what do you think the NMB would say to you if you brought up those foreign carriers as our pattern. I mean after they pick themselves up off the floor laughing. Go ask 1,000 businessmen if Delta is a competitor for Fedex or UPS. Tell me what 999 of them will say. You know the mediators aren't like grade school children that can be hoodwinked by silly arguments.

I saw the slide and only agree to a point and not the point your making. Those foreign carriers were important enough to fly the nc over there and cost it out.

It comes down to pilot wants and in turn the MEC's direction.

Quote:

So what do you base your assumption that Delta will just roll over if we go back for the 351st time to ask for more? You do understand that the basis for this deal was the 76 seat jets and what that allows them to do with the 50 seaters, so if you think there is some deal that doesn't involve those aircraft then you are sadly mistaken. If that is your bottom line, then don't pretend that there is some quick deal out there without those jets. Get ready to see what the f... around checklist looks like.

I have outlined that. This RJ deal saves Dal over a billion and allows them to be a evader in future consolidation and possible asset purchases. Without it they miss the boat on all of that. That is leverage. Plan A is much cheaper and more preferred on many levels. Increasing the pot for the price of a 777 is a small price to pay to move now. If I was CEO I would not risk it.

Quote:

I am not selling fear you are selling "a hope and a prayer". You tell me, how long have major airlines been in mediation in the last 7 years? I won't tell you, because you might get scared, you tell me. How are we different from them? What conditions make it so that we don't face the same historical fate as them?

It's not fear its representing pilots. We are a profitable and whatever gains you pruport are not what the pilots want. The fear innuendo is not making guys happy about the deal even if they decided they need to vote yes. That whole card is making guys mad.

Quote:

Here is what I base may decision on:

The last time we had a deadline with this management (JCBA in the merger) and missed it, the deal got worse by $250 million. We will never recover a penny of that loss, gone forever
Direct negotiations with management over 60 days and hundreds of proposals. The scope provisions were all fought over to the last day.
The advice of four professional negotiators with over 100 years negotiating experience
The advice of professional economists that have been studying this industry for dozens of years
The direct history of our competitors over the last 7 years and the lack of movement in their negotiations.
The lack of any meaningful retroactive pay even after multiple years in negotiations

This is not fear. Stop using childish emotional arguments like this. Are you trying to scare me into thinking that this TA will doom us for 6 years or more? Why are you telling the truth and I am selling fear. I give you facts and history and you give me...............what?

Doom you? No just the fact that all the merger will be done and leverage will not be there for the gains demanded.

Quote:

Give me some facts, give me some data, give me something more than "well I have a hunch." The last hunch we followed cost us $250 million. Before I risk $1 billion I want more than a hunch.

You may have myopia on this deal. It has many decent parts to it but the gains have loopholes. Those will cost us dearly in coming years.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1206535)

Still ain't gonna make me vote no though... sorry. A merger is gonna happen with or without us. I prefer to be paid a little up front, and a little when it happens. But apparently that's just me.

It ain't just you. It's me too!