Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
10-25-2012, 07:46 PM
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
Originally Posted by bigbusdriver
RH (C1 FO rep) and RB did most of the Compass negotiation. They did it while we were in bankruptcy and when our management was trying to reject our contract. I'm sorry it sucks for you, but you weren't complaining as you interviewed for your "NWA" job.
Guess you missed that one.
Thanks for expanding on why said unionoid was even further out of place.
10-25-2012, 07:46 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,619
Originally Posted by scambo1
Alfa;
We understand what the people on the other side of the table are saying and what they want.
Is DAL in danger of re-entering bankruptcy? No.
Is DAL, in the medium term, going to quit being able to pay down debt? No.
So why should the DAL pilots be concerned what the people on the other side of the table say or think? We still have not returned back to pre-bankruptcy pay and benefit levels. We did not choose the company's direction and strategies that led to bankruptcy.
They, on the other side of the table, have their goals, but they have made their mistakes. We footed their bill in a big way. We (DALPA) should only be concerned about what is meaningful on OUR side of the table...Unless, of course, we have accepted Bankruptcy rates and workrules as the new normal...Which BTW, I believe we (collectively) may have.
We understand what the people on the other side of the table are saying and what they want.
Is DAL in danger of re-entering bankruptcy? No.
Is DAL, in the medium term, going to quit being able to pay down debt? No.
So why should the DAL pilots be concerned what the people on the other side of the table say or think? We still have not returned back to pre-bankruptcy pay and benefit levels. We did not choose the company's direction and strategies that led to bankruptcy.
They, on the other side of the table, have their goals, but they have made their mistakes. We footed their bill in a big way. We (DALPA) should only be concerned about what is meaningful on OUR side of the table...Unless, of course, we have accepted Bankruptcy rates and workrules as the new normal...Which BTW, I believe we (collectively) may have.
The real answer as to why we should be concerned about they think is that they own the company we work for. At some point, the owners could say no to this constructive engagement process and we could go back to the old ways. Unfortunately, the old ways don't lead to a 12.8% raise by the amendable date they lead to giant turd for about 4-7 years.
So my response is that we should not respond to their concerns by throwing money at them, but we should continue to add value to the corporation in non-traditional ways. We should work with them in Washington and else where to ensure that their business plans can be executed. And yes, that means our work on the slot swap at LGA was more than worth it as they are succeeding, making more money, and giving some of it to us. (they are also slowly upgauging the flying too). We need to fight alongside them to ensure we don't get b-slapped by the Japanese government in Haneda.
We need to show that the extra dough-re-mi we are getting is worth it in the company's ability to execute their business plan. Look how side tracked AMR is right now with that train wreck they have going on. No one is winning that fight. We are doing a damn good job of running the operation right now, so that should continue. Thank your customers, look professional, help your fellow employees, only whine and moan when you are at 350 and not in the gate house. Those are the little things that we can do to add value to the company while still racking in more green.
If Delta wants to consolidate we should make that seamless and not turn it into another US Air or (to a lesser degree) United fiasco. Let's get money out of that action too.
So that is why we should care to some degree about what they think. They own the company and they have to sign off on any increases in our contract. Caring about what they think and doing whatever they want are two different things. It should be expected that our interests will diverge over our value and how we are compensated. It is just the rest of the time we should make the company succeed and then demand a share of that success.
10-25-2012, 07:51 PM
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
alfa and slow- why would the company in the investors call explain that they paid for our contract with minimal cost growth via our scope givebacks (more jumbo RJs), profit sharing givebacks, and workrul givebacks (increased utilization)?
10-25-2012, 07:56 PM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Originally Posted by slowplay
And that's a huge minus.
No E&FA. Who would SWAPA copy for their contract comparison?
And you can't replicate that in an independent union. While firewalled, ALPA's analysts get to look at 37 different contracts and 37 different management business plans. No independent nor CAPA airline gets that. You'd be stuck with single source and public data, leaving the pilot group with a lot less information than their negotiations adversary.
No Government Affairs. No seat at the IFALPA (ICAO) table. No seat at the Haneda negotiations with Japan. Limited influence in FT/DT implementation (especially with a change of government in Nov). No Roth. No traditional IRA rollover. Source taxation from broke states that you fly through. The independents all were on the outside looking in, or had limited rolls. Not a great spot for our pilot group, imo, and that's where you want us.
No Air Safety and Engineering. Limited NTSB, DHS and DOT access.
Those are just 3 examples that your plan would take away from Delta pilots that couldn't be recreated at a reasonable cost or are prohibited from happening by international treaty. I see that as a bad plan.
No E&FA. Who would SWAPA copy for their contract comparison?
And you can't replicate that in an independent union. While firewalled, ALPA's analysts get to look at 37 different contracts and 37 different management business plans. No independent nor CAPA airline gets that. You'd be stuck with single source and public data, leaving the pilot group with a lot less information than their negotiations adversary.No Government Affairs. No seat at the IFALPA (ICAO) table. No seat at the Haneda negotiations with Japan. Limited influence in FT/DT implementation (especially with a change of government in Nov). No Roth. No traditional IRA rollover. Source taxation from broke states that you fly through. The independents all were on the outside looking in, or had limited rolls. Not a great spot for our pilot group, imo, and that's where you want us.
No Air Safety and Engineering. Limited NTSB, DHS and DOT access.
Those are just 3 examples that your plan would take away from Delta pilots that couldn't be recreated at a reasonable cost or are prohibited from happening by international treaty. I see that as a bad plan.
EF&A was rented by the American Pilots and by many accounts did not even seek an analysis of the SWA contract.
Para#2
Gov't affaies are important, CAPA does have influence, but granted not as active as ALPA.
Please share with us the unbelievably critical
input ALPA had in Hanada negotiations...I wrote a letter...but negotiations? Was an ALPA representative allowed to speak until the adults realized who it was?FT/DT success remains to be seen. Let's not forget the entire premise that led us to FTDT was faulty-and not countered by (opportunistic) ALPA.
Roth and Rollover didn't affect me so I can't judge the importance of them.
Para 3. Air Safety and engineering? Are you saying the independants don't have safety programs and can't figure bad stuff out?
Access to alphabet soup gov't bureaucracies. Man how long did it take to get Lee's #1 priority to be something.
And the world also stopped spinning.
ALPA does things, yes. Noone disputes that. I am not willing to go back down this DPA discussion path...They are dead, they are just the only ones that don't realize it. It's going to take more than an OPR's worth of bullet points to convince me that ALPA is as effective as you believe it is.
10-25-2012, 07:57 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 328
Originally Posted by alfaromeo
Well, you are shooting the messenger and I pleaded with you not to shoot the messenger.
The real answer as to why we should be concerned about they think is that they own the company we work for. At some point, the owners could say no to this constructive engagement process and we could go back to the old ways. Unfortunately, the old ways don't lead to a 12.8% raise by the amendable date they lead to giant turd for about 4-7 years.
So my response is that we should not respond to their concerns by throwing money at them, but we should continue to add value to the corporation in non-traditional ways. We should work with them in Washington and else where to ensure that their business plans can be executed. And yes, that means our work on the slot swap at LGA was more than worth it as they are succeeding, making more money, and giving some of it to us. (they are also slowly upgauging the flying too). We need to fight alongside them to ensure we don't get b-slapped by the Japanese government in Haneda.
We need to show that the extra dough-re-mi we are getting is worth it in the company's ability to execute their business plan. Look how side tracked AMR is right now with that train wreck they have going on. No one is winning that fight. We are doing a damn good job of running the operation right now, so that should continue. Thank your customers, look professional, help your fellow employees, only whine and moan when you are at 350 and not in the gate house. Those are the little things that we can do to add value to the company while still racking in more green.
If Delta wants to consolidate we should make that seamless and not turn it into another US Air or (to a lesser degree) United fiasco. Let's get money out of that action too.
So that is why we should care to some degree about what they think. They own the company and they have to sign off on any increases in our contract. Caring about what they think and doing whatever they want are two different things. It should be expected that our interests will diverge over our value and how we are compensated. It is just the rest of the time we should make the company succeed and then demand a share of that success.
The real answer as to why we should be concerned about they think is that they own the company we work for. At some point, the owners could say no to this constructive engagement process and we could go back to the old ways. Unfortunately, the old ways don't lead to a 12.8% raise by the amendable date they lead to giant turd for about 4-7 years.
So my response is that we should not respond to their concerns by throwing money at them, but we should continue to add value to the corporation in non-traditional ways. We should work with them in Washington and else where to ensure that their business plans can be executed. And yes, that means our work on the slot swap at LGA was more than worth it as they are succeeding, making more money, and giving some of it to us. (they are also slowly upgauging the flying too). We need to fight alongside them to ensure we don't get b-slapped by the Japanese government in Haneda.
We need to show that the extra dough-re-mi we are getting is worth it in the company's ability to execute their business plan. Look how side tracked AMR is right now with that train wreck they have going on. No one is winning that fight. We are doing a damn good job of running the operation right now, so that should continue. Thank your customers, look professional, help your fellow employees, only whine and moan when you are at 350 and not in the gate house. Those are the little things that we can do to add value to the company while still racking in more green.
If Delta wants to consolidate we should make that seamless and not turn it into another US Air or (to a lesser degree) United fiasco. Let's get money out of that action too.
So that is why we should care to some degree about what they think. They own the company and they have to sign off on any increases in our contract. Caring about what they think and doing whatever they want are two different things. It should be expected that our interests will diverge over our value and how we are compensated. It is just the rest of the time we should make the company succeed and then demand a share of that success.
10-25-2012, 08:01 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
alfa and slow- why would the company in the investors call explain that they paid for our contract with minimal cost growth via our scope givebacks (more jumbo RJs), profit sharing givebacks, and workrule givebacks (increased utilization)?
"Part of what we’re doing here is putting a better product in the market, better fuel efficiency, fewer airplanes in the air and our customers tell us they much prefer flying on mainline airplanes rather than 34-, 44-, and 50-seat airplanes."
Mainline = 70/76 seaters? If so, I wanna fly em'.
10-25-2012, 08:02 PM
Sho me da money!
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: B25, Left
Posts: 947
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
alfa and slow- why would the company in the investors call explain that they paid for our contract with minimal cost growth via our scope givebacks (more jumbo RJs), profit sharing givebacks, and workrul givebacks (increased utilization)?
Have to look at this thing from all sides!
10-25-2012, 08:08 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Originally Posted by FIIGMO
Those RJ's were coming anyway. The TA just made sure we got something for it... And we did...
Have to look at this thing from all sides!
Have to look at this thing from all sides!
10-25-2012, 08:16 PM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Originally Posted by alfaromeo
Well, you are shooting the messenger and I pleaded with you not to shoot the messenger.
The point I was trying to make is: Some constructive engagement is good...clearly. However, prior to the TA, I made the point several times that the folks at the top of DALPA only have experience in concessionary negotiation.
A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down. Unfortunately, we ended up with a contract that has many concessions in it. (medicine) It has one payraise and some (barely if at all) COLA. The spoonful of sugar is that it was negotiated quickly.
To continue to defend the sales job and the (questionable) process and further to do this given the backdrop of the earnings call yesterday is IMO a stockholm syndrome or justification that our bankruptcy contract has become the new normal.
I know I'm a w-2 employee at DAL. I don't even want to visit the 4th floor. Do I think I could do many of their jobs...yes.
10-25-2012, 08:19 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: M88B
Posts: 1,179
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
What RJs were coming anyways?
Management is sly as a fox when it comes to getting around contracts. I'm sure they could have come up with something (EX. Freedom - Been into BNA in the past 5 years...)
Ahh next time.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
