Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 1379375)

Mon Dieu ! Qu'êtes-vous un diplômé d'académie d'Armée de l'Air ?

Originally Posted by Flamer (Post 1379356)

Well, congratulations on figuring out that if you take TWO weeks of vacation you can work a total of two days less than your SWA counterpart who took no vacation, worked 12 days and got paid more than you for the month even if you were flying the 747.

Thanks for bringing DAL's great vacation to light again.

Ask a SWA guy next time you see one about SWAptamizer. Now, that is eye opening.

Originally Posted by shiznit (Post 1379351)

two weeks vacation, ALV 75, extra X-Day YES:

Paid 85:31
8 on call days
9 X-Days
"Full" when credit reaches 40:02



One week of vacation, no training events, May is a 31 day month:
(using April Data)
April 73N B extra X-Day: YES
April ALV for 73N was 75:30,
Reserve Gar. 73:30:

May 73N B on reserve:
Paid 78:39
12 on call days
12 X-Days
"Full" when credit reaches 56:55

If you download the "PBS Gouge" on the Crew Resources and Scheduling page there is an excel that an "ALPA GUY" constructed that will do all the math for you. You can input other types of leaves, CQ days, etc.

No offense T:D, I'm sure yours works well too. I made my own spreadsheet on it a while back but ditched it once I used the one the ALPA GUY designed.....

Originally Posted by TenYearsGone (Post 1379418)

I say this because slowly but surely it is getting closer to headcount. As our productivity increases, the gap between requirement and headcount becomes closer. That number, in the past, went from 11XXX, 108XX, 105XX, 104XX and now 94XX. The trend is alarming and my career progression is not looking too hot. The bottom keeps getting closer. Sorry if I offend you with my observation.

TEN

Originally Posted by Imapilot2 (Post 1379452)

Offended? Not sure why you say that but let me ask you this. You bring this up while we have been reducing our fleet after the merger, not solely but mostly the 80 or so DC9's we all saw coming. You allude to the belief that this is the size of Delta that RA secretly wants. Many of the new planes are replacement ac but with the 100 737's, the added MD 90's and the 88 B717's, is the timing of your statement our low point where the" alarming trend" will cause your career progression to not be so hot? OR is it simply just a low point that will recover to prior levels as we now start to receive another 200 ac over the next three years?

Originally Posted by TenYearsGone (Post 1379475)

The 22d2 I am referring to is a forecast for 2014 (the future). There are no secrets to what RA wants. He likes a mean and lean machine and I am here to say we are on our way to becoming a more productive and lean airline (good for Delta's livlihood-Bad for bottom of the list pilots:D). Why do you think the airline has not even thought about hiring? We should have been "gearing" up yesterday. Again, these are my observations, hopefully I am wrong but the plethora of 22d2s the company has been furnishing have been forecasting a negative trend in Delta's need for pilots.

TEN

Originally Posted by johnso29 (Post 1379476)

..........

Originally Posted by johnso29 (Post 1379477)

Those are always low, forecast or not. Delta can not function with that few pilots. Plus, the staffing formula won't allow it.

Originally Posted by TenYearsGone (Post 1379480)

I use the 22d2 number as a "safe point". If we were to furlough, then any number smaller than the 22d2 count would be safe. Any number above that is toast. Just my gouge. In times of need (force majeure) can the company change the staffing formula? THanks

TEN