Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,530
Likes: 0
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,562
Likes: 106
From: Road construction signholder
Timbo;
I've been on the 777 for over 5 years. You and I probably went to school at close to the same time. Like you, I have struggled with the trip mix issues. Over the past year, I have been able to average slightly over 90 hrs/mo...AVERAGED OUT. To do this, I have done the vacation month stuff, LCA stuff, GS, RLL to big GS, every trick except parking.
I totally agree with the fact that this needs a fix. I like the bowwave, and I've never understood why there were different rules for opentime/swap/pickup. Recently, there have been improvements to line building ability.
If there was no pickup limit, I am certain that several guys would be on the road 30 days a month. I like to be on the road less than 12.
I've been on the 777 for over 5 years. You and I probably went to school at close to the same time. Like you, I have struggled with the trip mix issues. Over the past year, I have been able to average slightly over 90 hrs/mo...AVERAGED OUT. To do this, I have done the vacation month stuff, LCA stuff, GS, RLL to big GS, every trick except parking.
I totally agree with the fact that this needs a fix. I like the bowwave, and I've never understood why there were different rules for opentime/swap/pickup. Recently, there have been improvements to line building ability.
If there was no pickup limit, I am certain that several guys would be on the road 30 days a month. I like to be on the road less than 12.
Despite my earlier post extolling the virtues of "efficiency" and the fact that pilots who want to should have the option of flying more...I agree with this. I would love to see the Bow Wave and Spillback options restored. Talk about flexibility. Also, I don't like the idea of flying 17 days a month. Even though I think guys should be allowed to fly more--economic philosophy and all that--have you ever noticed that the guys obsessed with flying the most, are the ones you like to fly with the least?
Runs with scissors
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 7,847
Likes: 0
From: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
I can understand the guys who are near to, or over 60, wanting to fly to the FAR's, to recoupe as much of their lost DB money as possible, no matter what seat they are in.
I've been flying with a lot of over age 60 F/O's who were displaced off the 767 Er Capt. seat. They are trying to pick up as time much as possible.
And my standard of living has not changed at all since I was a MD11 F/O, 15 years ago. I'm in the same house, with the same wife and same 4 kids. Of course they grew up and got much more expesive!
In fact, I had a bigger boat then, than I do now! But at least I don't have any DB money to retire on, so I got that going for me!
Kinda quiet around the L&G thread. Rehash of trip parking seems to have run its course. Soooo .... here's some light reading that might stir up some trouble --
We haven't discussed the dues sucking bloated bureaucracy in Herndon for a while.
Red meat for the watchdogs among us:
Organization Query Page (Disclosure)
Use the drop down menu under "Union Name by Abbreviation" and select ALPA. Then hit "Submit" at the bottom of the page.
ALPA National's reports are at the bottom of the list. (000-179)
There are several reports available and several ways to view them. Just check the box next to 000-179 and hit submit or click on the report title or click on the union name.
Especially interesting are some of the "Specific Reports" down below.
The Officer/Employee report is always good reading.
Moak's total take for 2011 was $540,408.00
Lots of Lexus and BMWs in that parking lot up there in Herndon.
Maybe someone good with Excel can post the salaries here.
The "Payer/Payee" reports also show some interesting expenditures by our Washington overlords. Some mighty big bar tabs.
Liquor notwithstanding, our biggest expenditure by far is for lawyers. Hard to figure out how we keep losing all these monster lawsuits when we pay this much for legal advice.
We haven't discussed the dues sucking bloated bureaucracy in Herndon for a while.
Red meat for the watchdogs among us:
Organization Query Page (Disclosure)
Use the drop down menu under "Union Name by Abbreviation" and select ALPA. Then hit "Submit" at the bottom of the page.
ALPA National's reports are at the bottom of the list. (000-179)
There are several reports available and several ways to view them. Just check the box next to 000-179 and hit submit or click on the report title or click on the union name.
Especially interesting are some of the "Specific Reports" down below.
The Officer/Employee report is always good reading.
Moak's total take for 2011 was $540,408.00
Lots of Lexus and BMWs in that parking lot up there in Herndon.
Maybe someone good with Excel can post the salaries here.
The "Payer/Payee" reports also show some interesting expenditures by our Washington overlords. Some mighty big bar tabs.

Liquor notwithstanding, our biggest expenditure by far is for lawyers. Hard to figure out how we keep losing all these monster lawsuits when we pay this much for legal advice.
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Likes: 0
Oh, even when legal advisors are paid for their services it doesn't mean that their advice is taken and acted upon. The client (that's up pilots) get to make our own decisions. Sometimes we make bad ones (for example, APA getting fined for illegal sickout when their advisors told them not to challenge the judge).
Last edited by slowplay; 10-09-2012 at 10:52 AM. Reason: clarification

Just some eye candy.....
Check out the latest DALPA email. They're gonna fire up the DPN and survey all pilots. Take the time to take the call!
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
I assume you see that as a problem. Just out of curiosity, do you see that as problem a) because you don't think Moak is effective, or b) no ALPA President is worth that much, no matter how effective he/she is?
I've always thought that we were pretty silly to argue that our executives and union officers (at that level) should not be well compensated, as long as it's commensurate to their performance. For example Mullin deserved nothing but a pink slip. On the other hand, RA does a good job, and I'm not concerned that his salary is out of proportion to the job. I also don't spend much time worrying about Cortelyou, Bastian, and guys like that. I'll sidestep the discussion about FPL, which I don't understand much, except to say that also should be relative to the performance of the individual. Some don't deserve any, some are worth their weight in gold.
What I am concerned about is that I also get compensated in accordance to my contribution to the company. I want Delta to have well-compensated executives, and I expect ALPA's President to have a comfortable income. That level of responsibility should be paid well enough that it's not like charity to accept the position. I don't even believe that the president of a 50,000+ member union needs to be paid as much as the highest paying Captain. As long as the proportion between the two is reasonable, I can live with it. I see the CEO job as being good for up to about 25 times the average salary, and I can live with a union president getting, say 5X the average pilot's salary.
I know this is anathema to most people, and I'll probably get crucified for this post, but I'm pretty sure that every time we talk about who else needs to be paid less, we start down a pathetic vindictive path, one that invariably sees us at the bottom of the raw deal.
I want to talk about getting paid well. I don't mind having a debate about Moak being... woerth 500K. I know Prater wasn't worth a dime, and the scumbag before not a nickel. I just don't think 500K for that position is weird, even if it is my money. That person operates in Washington, where money sloshes around all over the place. I want to attract ambitious and smart people to the job, and I expect they're going to get something for being there. It can be our hard-earned money, or it can be easier money dispensed by the lobbyists.
I've always thought that we were pretty silly to argue that our executives and union officers (at that level) should not be well compensated, as long as it's commensurate to their performance. For example Mullin deserved nothing but a pink slip. On the other hand, RA does a good job, and I'm not concerned that his salary is out of proportion to the job. I also don't spend much time worrying about Cortelyou, Bastian, and guys like that. I'll sidestep the discussion about FPL, which I don't understand much, except to say that also should be relative to the performance of the individual. Some don't deserve any, some are worth their weight in gold.
What I am concerned about is that I also get compensated in accordance to my contribution to the company. I want Delta to have well-compensated executives, and I expect ALPA's President to have a comfortable income. That level of responsibility should be paid well enough that it's not like charity to accept the position. I don't even believe that the president of a 50,000+ member union needs to be paid as much as the highest paying Captain. As long as the proportion between the two is reasonable, I can live with it. I see the CEO job as being good for up to about 25 times the average salary, and I can live with a union president getting, say 5X the average pilot's salary.
I know this is anathema to most people, and I'll probably get crucified for this post, but I'm pretty sure that every time we talk about who else needs to be paid less, we start down a pathetic vindictive path, one that invariably sees us at the bottom of the raw deal.
I want to talk about getting paid well. I don't mind having a debate about Moak being... woerth 500K. I know Prater wasn't worth a dime, and the scumbag before not a nickel. I just don't think 500K for that position is weird, even if it is my money. That person operates in Washington, where money sloshes around all over the place. I want to attract ambitious and smart people to the job, and I expect they're going to get something for being there. It can be our hard-earned money, or it can be easier money dispensed by the lobbyists.
The really expensive ones that come to mind are Duke/Spellacy, the UAL notes case and now TWA. ALPA had to sell its HQ building to pay off Spellacy. The UAL notes case cost mega-millions even after our "off-shore insurance" paid out and TWA ...... yea yea I know. It ain't over. No money yet. yada yada. I smell a settlement coming.
The one that really ticks me off is the settlement with the RJDC. Those pinheads didn't deserve a dime and they certainly didn't deserve a pre-signing chop on Section 1 of our contract.
My point is that ALPA National is a piggy bank for Cohen, Weiss and Simon and all their spin-offs and former partners turned consultants. Look at that DOL payee report. Its insane how much we pay those people every month. And that's on top of our in-house lawyers.
And after all that, they can't even write an enforcable scope clause.
The machine in Herndon costs way too much. It is a typical Washington bureaucracy run amok and it needs to be brought under control.
Just my opinion.
The one that really ticks me off is the settlement with the RJDC. Those pinheads didn't deserve a dime and they certainly didn't deserve a pre-signing chop on Section 1 of our contract.
My point is that ALPA National is a piggy bank for Cohen, Weiss and Simon and all their spin-offs and former partners turned consultants. Look at that DOL payee report. Its insane how much we pay those people every month. And that's on top of our in-house lawyers.
And after all that, they can't even write an enforcable scope clause.
The machine in Herndon costs way too much. It is a typical Washington bureaucracy run amok and it needs to be brought under control.
Just my opinion.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post





