Airline Pilot Central Forums

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)

johnso29 06-08-2012 05:31 PM


Originally Posted by finis72 (Post 1208251)
Elvis, I can see you are not a math major. If I were you I would delete the post, it's embarrassing.

I think he cut and paste it from the DALPA forum. I'm not disagreeing with you, but could you show us the correct math?

Bill Lumberg 06-08-2012 05:34 PM


Originally Posted by Elvis90 (Post 1208243)
"I was at the Atlanta North roadshow

$1,290,000,000 is a bit of a stretch

We are not getting $430M a year at day 1,*Its going to be drawn out over 3.5 years

2012 4% day 1, end of 2012 we are at $40M but we already gave up higher crew utilization(paid for)

2013 8.5% of which we trade 2% profit sharing nets 6.5% equals net $210M(assuming straightline profit)

2014 $210M plus 1% or $20M (since 2% profit sharing is substituted for hard $$$) = $230M

2015 $210M + $40M= $250M

Grand total approx $730M

We need $80M to $100M a year just to keep up with inflation or $350M over 3.5 years so we are giving up(selling) more 76 seat SNB jets to the commuter, better reserve utilization (ALV+15) higher crew utilization (current ALV cap +2) for $730M which is a paltry $380M over our cost of living. Leaves a sour taste in my mouth, we are making our increases by working harder and relaxing scope.

Cost neutral means we pay for the raises not someone else."

Day 1 is a DOS bonus. Remember we are still 7 months from the amendable date, and we just the last raise (4%) from the last year of our current contract 6 months back Jan 1st. Also, will the productivity enhancements be used this upcoming Fall and Winter? Have you seen the scheduled cutbacks to Europe? We are cutting JFK to Rome for the slow season, for the first time in decades. Where will there be a need for 99 hour reserves? At least the reserves can make a couple extra hours per month, up to 72 from 70, compared the our current slow months.

Elvis90 06-08-2012 05:36 PM


Originally Posted by finis72 (Post 1208251)
Elvis, I can see you are not a math major. If I were you I would delete the post, it's embarrassing.

2012 - $40M
2013 - $210M
2014 - $230M
2015 - $250M

Total - $730M

Please tell me where the math is wrong? And you're right, I wasn't a math major; I was an Aeronautical Engineering Major. That was my Bachelor's; my Master's is in Mechanical Engineering. I thought about Air Force Test Pilot School, but elected to fly the B-1 bomber instead.

What was your Master's Degree in?

Elvis90 06-08-2012 05:37 PM


Originally Posted by johnso29 (Post 1208254)
I think he cut and paste it from the DALPA forum. I'm not disagreeing with you, but could you show us the correct math?

You are correct sir, just a cut & paste from someone who attended a roadshow, and these were his takeaways.

finis72 06-08-2012 05:52 PM


Originally Posted by Elvis90 (Post 1208261)
You are correct sir, just a cut & paste.

The 4% initial raise is every year for 31/2 years, the 6.5% is every year for 3 years etc. The 2% profit sharing reduction is every year but not compounded and that's only if DL makes 2 bil from 2013 to 2015, if they make less then our reduction will be less than 2%.
I have an accounting degree and so I had to jump on what appears to me to be not factual cost analysis. Sorry about the math comment, I did what I complain about and that's attacking the poster.

Elvis90 06-08-2012 05:55 PM


Originally Posted by finis72 (Post 1208268)
The 4% initial raise is every year for 31/2 years, the 6.5% is every year for 3 years etc. The 2% profit sharing reduction is every year but not compounded and that's only if DL makes 2 bil from 2013 to 2015, if they make less then our reduction will be less than 2%.
I have an accounting degree and so I had to jump on what appears to me to be not factual cost analysis. Sorry about the math comment, I did what I complain about and that's attacking the poster.

No problem dude. Let's get all the facts out - if you have them, please post them so we can all be informed.

tsquare 06-08-2012 05:58 PM


Originally Posted by Elvis90 (Post 1208270)
No problem dude. Let's get all the facts out - if you have them, please post them so we can all be informed.

I think he pretty much just did with that post.

finis72 06-08-2012 06:23 PM


Originally Posted by Elvis90 (Post 1208270)
No problem dude. Let's get all the facts out - if you have them, please post them so we can all be informed.

I've heard 3 different sets of numbers ranging from 730 mil to a little over 1 bil. Using your original post on this subject you used an inflation number of 350 mil. Food for thought; if we vote no and get tabled by the NMB(a real possibility) then in 2015 we will have given up 1.08 bil (730 +350) in total costs and to make that up we will have to get 1.81 bil ( thats using the low number 730)in contract cost day 1 ! I don't think that will happen. Compounding is a wonderful thing or a terrible thing,just depends what side of the fence you are on. You say that's worse case I say that is the more than likely outcome and I think that's where our major difference lies. I'm good with either yay or nay on this TA, but yay is more financially sound.

Elvis90 06-08-2012 06:45 PM


Originally Posted by finis72 (Post 1208287)
I've heard 3 different sets of numbers ranging from 730 mil to a little over 1 bil. Using your original post on this subject you used an inflation number of 350 mil. Food for thought; if we vote no and get tabled by the NMB(a real possibility) then in 2015 we will have given up 1.08 bil (730 +350) in total costs and to make that up we will have to get 1.81 bil ( thats using the low number 730)in contract cost day 1 ! I don't think that will happen. Compounding is a wonderful thing or a terrible thing,just depends what side of the fence you are on. You say that's worse case I say that is the more than likely outcome and I think that's where our major difference lies. I'm good with either yay or nay on this TA, but yay is more financially sound.

I've decided to do my own 'back of the napkin' math for fun:

10,850 pilots (from DAL's 2011 10-K)

Average $130,000/year (a complete WAG on my part, but we can vary it)

In 2011 ... Total pilot wages were $1,410,000,000 = 10,850 pilots x $130,000

+ 4% on Jan 1, 2012 = $1,467,000,000 in total pilot costs

2012 - 4% - $28M = $1.467B x 0.04 x 1/2 (for half a year)

2013 - 12.8% - $180M = $1.467B x .128

2014 - 16.2% - $228M = etc.

2015 - 19.7. - $278M = etc.

Total - $722M = $28+$180+$228+$278M over 3 1/2 years.

The 4/12.8/16.2/19.7% numbers are from a Negotiator's Notepad. So I think 3/4 of a Billion is the Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) for this contract. This is my best guess, not a cut & paste. Dang, that's close to the $730M from the guy on the DALPA forums.

This doesn't include inflation, which would reduce our raise significantly. As a good friend has told me, this is about a 10% raise plus inflation.

What was the savings on the 50-seaters?

slowplay 06-08-2012 06:47 PM


Originally Posted by finis72 (Post 1208268)
The 4% initial raise is every year for 31/2 years, the 6.5% is every year for 3 years etc. The 2% profit sharing reduction is every year but not compounded and that's only if DL makes 2 bil from 2013 to 2015, if they make less then our reduction will be less than 2%.
I have an accounting degree and so I had to jump on what appears to me to be not factual cost analysis. Sorry about the math comment, I did what I complain about and that's attacking the poster.

Finis, your comments are accurate. Elvis has reposted a bad analysis.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:24 PM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands