Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
I mainly just wanted to toss out a subtle reminder that even our little 4,8,3,3 pay raises came at a significant cost.
The old "what are you willing to give up for that" rears its ugly head. We gave up a large chunk of our profit sharing. And that could be a pretty big number if we have many more "blowout" quarters like the current one Anderson described in the LCA meeting.
(oops, are we now allowed to say what happened in that meeting?)
270 X 140,000 = 37,800,000
3 years X 37,800,000 = 113,400,000
So by reducing the pilot headcount by 270, the company saved 113 million throughout the life of the contract? These are obviously rough numbers, just trying to illustrate that the reduced pilot jobs is a huge savings for the company. I'd love to see the amount of $$$ required for each section of our contract.
Not exactly true.
We won't take any hit on the profit sharing for this year.
Read the fine print.
For 2012, we get 15% until profits reach $2.5 billion; the 20% kicks in when profits reach $2.5 billion, just like the previous contract.
It used to start at $1.5 billion in the pre-merger BANKRUPTCY contract, when DAL was about 60% the size it is now.
It will be interesting to see how much we gave back with that item, if "very little" is considered "interesting".
It will be REALLY interesting in 2013 when the 15% drops to 10%, if you factor in that the increase in pay of 12.84% and the other soft money of 3-5% will all but offset the
That little detail could cancel out an entire 2.2% of the one of the 4,8,3,3 "raise numbers" in a "worst case scenario", but if the company isn't profitable I'm glad we got hard money like most pilots have been wanting for a while since many have said they don't trust profit sharing.
It's OK though. We brilliantly negotiated to get paid more hours each month for the same amount of work to make up the loss.
We won't take any hit on the profit sharing for this year.
Read the fine print.
For 2012, we get 15% until profits reach $2.5 billion; the 20% kicks in when profits reach $2.5 billion, just like the previous contract.
It used to start at $1.5 billion in the pre-merger BANKRUPTCY contract, when DAL was about 60% the size it is now.
It will be interesting to see how much we gave back with that item, if "very little" is considered "interesting".
It will be REALLY interesting in 2013 when the 15% drops to 10%, if you factor in that the increase in pay of 12.84% and the other soft money of 3-5% will all but offset the
That little detail could cancel out an entire 2.2% of the one of the 4,8,3,3 "raise numbers" in a "worst case scenario", but if the company isn't profitable I'm glad we got hard money like most pilots have been wanting for a while since many have said they don't trust profit sharing.
It's OK though. We brilliantly negotiated to get paid more hours each month for the same amount of work to make up the loss.
Public Math:
At $1.8B profit, the PS percentage is roughly 7.28% under the 15% plan.
At $1.8B profit, the PS percentage is roughly 4.85% under the 10% plan.
Total pilot payroll costs will be roughly 15% more in 2013 (pay tables 12.84% and let's be conservative and say 2.16% work rules/soft time).
Old PWA: $100k plus 7.28% bonus = $100,000 + 7,280 = $107,280
New PWA: $115k plus 4.85% bonus = $115,000 + 5,577 = $120,577
You see a pilot making $1,803 LESS in 2013 with the new agreement.
I see that same pilot making $13,549 MORE in 2013 with the agreement.
Was the PS change worth it?
Very impressive. Statistically speaking.
We still gave back money. Possibly big money.
Just please be wary of all those numbers, charts and graphs.
I sometimes worry that alfaromeo has hypnotized you guys.
We still gave back money. Possibly big money.
Just please be wary of all those numbers, charts and graphs.
I sometimes worry that alfaromeo has hypnotized you guys.
Last edited by Check Essential; 10-23-2012 at 07:04 AM. Reason: stared at the graphic too long
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
FYP
Public Math:
At $1.8B profit, the PS percentage is roughly 7.28% under the 15% plan.
At $1.8B profit, the PS percentage is roughly 4.85% under the 10% plan.
Total pilot payroll costs will be roughly 15% more in 2013 (pay tables 12.84% and let's be conservative and say 2.16% work rules/soft time).
Old PWA: $100k plus 7.28% bonus = $100,000 + 7,280 = $107,280
New PWA: $115k plus 4.85% bonus = $115,000 + 5,577 = $120,577
You see a pilot making $1,803 LESS in 2013 with the new agreement.
I see that same pilot making $13,549 MORE in 2013 with the agreement.
Was the PS change worth it?
Public Math:
At $1.8B profit, the PS percentage is roughly 7.28% under the 15% plan.
At $1.8B profit, the PS percentage is roughly 4.85% under the 10% plan.
Total pilot payroll costs will be roughly 15% more in 2013 (pay tables 12.84% and let's be conservative and say 2.16% work rules/soft time).
Old PWA: $100k plus 7.28% bonus = $100,000 + 7,280 = $107,280
New PWA: $115k plus 4.85% bonus = $115,000 + 5,577 = $120,577
You see a pilot making $1,803 LESS in 2013 with the new agreement.
I see that same pilot making $13,549 MORE in 2013 with the agreement.
Was the PS change worth it?
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Question with regards to uniforms:
I was walking around in Terminal C yesterday and I saw plenty of pilots who work for express carriers walking around with no hat and an appearance I would assume Richard would not approve of. You contrast that with the pilots who are walking around in Term A and B and we look better. I will admit we have our guys who dont wear hats and look bad (it is far less than the express carriers) but how can Flight Ops make us dress the part (which I agree with) and then have our passengers connect to Term C where those pilots there are not held to the same standards?
Either we change the express uniforms so they dont look like our mainline ones, or we have them dress to our standards.
It seems to me this is a glaring hole in Richards and FLt OPs communication in regards to appearance standards.
Thoughts and input?
Thanks
I was walking around in Terminal C yesterday and I saw plenty of pilots who work for express carriers walking around with no hat and an appearance I would assume Richard would not approve of. You contrast that with the pilots who are walking around in Term A and B and we look better. I will admit we have our guys who dont wear hats and look bad (it is far less than the express carriers) but how can Flight Ops make us dress the part (which I agree with) and then have our passengers connect to Term C where those pilots there are not held to the same standards?
Either we change the express uniforms so they dont look like our mainline ones, or we have them dress to our standards.
It seems to me this is a glaring hole in Richards and FLt OPs communication in regards to appearance standards.
Thoughts and input?
Thanks
Question with regards to uniforms:
I was walking around in Terminal C yesterday and I saw plenty of pilots who work for express carriers walking around with no hat and an appearance I would assume Richard would not approve of. You contrast that with the pilots who are walking around in Term A and B and we look better. I will admit we have our guys who dont wear hats and look bad (it is far less than the express carriers) but how can Flight Ops make us dress the part (which I agree with) and then have our passengers connect to Term C where those pilots there are not held to the same standards?
Either we change the express uniforms so they dont look like our mainline ones, or we have them dress to our standards.
It seems to me this is a glaring hole in Richards and FLt OPs communication in regards to appearance standards.
Thoughts and input?
Thanks
I was walking around in Terminal C yesterday and I saw plenty of pilots who work for express carriers walking around with no hat and an appearance I would assume Richard would not approve of. You contrast that with the pilots who are walking around in Term A and B and we look better. I will admit we have our guys who dont wear hats and look bad (it is far less than the express carriers) but how can Flight Ops make us dress the part (which I agree with) and then have our passengers connect to Term C where those pilots there are not held to the same standards?
Either we change the express uniforms so they dont look like our mainline ones, or we have them dress to our standards.
It seems to me this is a glaring hole in Richards and FLt OPs communication in regards to appearance standards.
Thoughts and input?
Thanks
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,831
Likes: 172
From: window seat
Tiny little "operated by" stickers aren't sufficient. I'd be in favor of contract language forbidding a common paint job and forcing all itineraries that don't touch mainline to generate tickets with exclusively the OAL name(s) and logo(s) with "Delta" only being in tiny fine print with asterisks and ball flags leading you to the back of the ticket to figure that part out.
I'd also insist on prominent PA's that emphasise the OAL carrier exclusively. As for uniforms, we don't want ACMI cheap labor providers being seamless for the customer. We want the opposite. So WRT uniforms, its a good thing that ours is distinctive and, honestly, better by quite a bit compared to most of the fake virtual airlines our company is allowed to "partner" with without using our pilots.
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
From: Doing what you do, for less.
Question with regards to uniforms:
I was walking around in Terminal C yesterday and I saw plenty of pilots who work for express carriers walking around with no hat and an appearance I would assume Richard would not approve of. You contrast that with the pilots who are walking around in Term A and B and we look better. I will admit we have our guys who dont wear hats and look bad (it is far less than the express carriers) but how can Flight Ops make us dress the part (which I agree with) and then have our passengers connect to Term C where those pilots there are not held to the same standards?
Either we change the express uniforms so they dont look like our mainline ones, or we have them dress to our standards.
It seems to me this is a glaring hole in Richards and FLt OPs communication in regards to appearance standards.
Thoughts and input?
Thanks
I was walking around in Terminal C yesterday and I saw plenty of pilots who work for express carriers walking around with no hat and an appearance I would assume Richard would not approve of. You contrast that with the pilots who are walking around in Term A and B and we look better. I will admit we have our guys who dont wear hats and look bad (it is far less than the express carriers) but how can Flight Ops make us dress the part (which I agree with) and then have our passengers connect to Term C where those pilots there are not held to the same standards?
Either we change the express uniforms so they dont look like our mainline ones, or we have them dress to our standards.
It seems to me this is a glaring hole in Richards and FLt OPs communication in regards to appearance standards.
Thoughts and input?
Thanks
This is what happens when you outsource.
Gloopy - I agree. I'd rather see the connection carriers have their own company names on the side of their aircraft. Treat them like a JV...PA: "Skywest 200, in partnership with Delta Air Lines."
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post





