Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
04-23-2013, 09:10 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2011
Position: Scratching my head in the right seat of a Douglas product
Posts: 225
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
Ok thanks for the correction. But end result is still the same, ~110 per year.
04-23-2013, 09:22 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: A big one that looks like a little one
Posts: 633
Originally Posted by Express pilot
I never said anything about yellow slip for a SC. I know how that works.
Everything your saying is true. In my example this was not the case. No yellow slip for SC. They just assign how they want. This is what needs to be fixed. Guy junior to me does not request to be on SC but gets the time I requested if needed for SC. They say they don't have to look at it. SC then get assigned out of Seniority order.
Am I crazy to think that we should all just bid 6 days of SC when we bid our gold days? They put out the SC shifts they want, we fight over them in the bidding process, they get all their SCs covered. Then the regular RES rules apply. If we're on SC status, we're 23.O ladder people, and if we're on LC, we're 23.N people. Trips come and go. Only thing they lose is their ability to manipulate SC levels for IROPs. Nothing 4:30 credit above guarantee wouldn't fix though for a couple extra hands on deck...
04-23-2013, 09:32 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,898
Originally Posted by Jonny Drama
Very true, unless waived by Delta. There are about 300 hundred flow eligible pilots left. And after reading the way it was written in the airline profiles, it was easy to see the confusion. I went back to add that, but my "edit" time had expired.
04-24-2013, 04:29 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,273
Originally Posted by Avgwhitemale
Thank you!!! I know I am not a part of the DAL click on this website but I have been jumping up and down trying to get thoughts on this issue. I know we seem to love our crazy crummy hats and double breasted jackets but as a group we haven't been honest with ourselves. Have we given up too much top end scope? I don't expect anybody in the top 33% of our seniority list to respond to that question. They are on their last contract. For the bottom 66%....we need to ask this question. We need to address it when our next contract comes up. Take a look at near peer fleets. UAL has a very impressive wb fleet. UAL has a positive growth plan for their nb and wb fleet. DAL has a bunch of used 717s and a oil refinery. The company is making money. I believe their plan moving forward must be to expand our international footprint through JV. We simply do not have a wb fleet capable of competing.
04-24-2013, 05:38 AM
Everyday is a weekend!
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: Seasonal Help
Posts: 317
I think most of us realize that the sequestration is a political tool but I thought you would all like to see this letter. It was written by a FAST leader whose name I will not include.
"I planned an FAA Safety Team seminar on the subject of non-towered operations at towers closed by sequestration. The speakers listed would be FAA Safety Team members, local ATC controllers, and FSDO inspectors.
The document was released to 8,000-plus pilots in the Tampa Bay area by FAASafety.gov around April 1. On April 3, I got a phone call from FAA Safety Team management advising me to revise the notice and remove any mention of FAA involvement. I expressed my extreme displeasure with that direction, but I revised the notice. Two days later I got a call from the same manager telling me that FAA HQ wanted me to change the title and remove any mention of the word "sequestration." In addition, I was advised to not discuss budgetary items or sequestration with pilots.
I cannot detail here what I said to the manager because a censor would redact them. I refused to change the title. I also threatened to resign as a Lead Team Rep (been one for 25 years) because I will not let the FAA trample on my First Amendment rights. The manager asked me not to resign, especially when I told him the next call I was making would be to the media.
The FAA is not paying a penny for the countless hours I have devoted to the FAA Safety Program. I refuse to be intimidated by faceless Washington HQ types who cannot stand the heat brought on by their total disregard for aviation safety.
The title of the seminar was revised without me. It was held last week with 66 pilots attending. We discussed everything that the FAA told me not to discuss.
This attempt by FAA HQ to manage the story cannot be tolerated. That's why I am writing this letter."
"I planned an FAA Safety Team seminar on the subject of non-towered operations at towers closed by sequestration. The speakers listed would be FAA Safety Team members, local ATC controllers, and FSDO inspectors.
The document was released to 8,000-plus pilots in the Tampa Bay area by FAASafety.gov around April 1. On April 3, I got a phone call from FAA Safety Team management advising me to revise the notice and remove any mention of FAA involvement. I expressed my extreme displeasure with that direction, but I revised the notice. Two days later I got a call from the same manager telling me that FAA HQ wanted me to change the title and remove any mention of the word "sequestration." In addition, I was advised to not discuss budgetary items or sequestration with pilots.
I cannot detail here what I said to the manager because a censor would redact them. I refused to change the title. I also threatened to resign as a Lead Team Rep (been one for 25 years) because I will not let the FAA trample on my First Amendment rights. The manager asked me not to resign, especially when I told him the next call I was making would be to the media.
The FAA is not paying a penny for the countless hours I have devoted to the FAA Safety Program. I refuse to be intimidated by faceless Washington HQ types who cannot stand the heat brought on by their total disregard for aviation safety.
The title of the seminar was revised without me. It was held last week with 66 pilots attending. We discussed everything that the FAA told me not to discuss.
This attempt by FAA HQ to manage the story cannot be tolerated. That's why I am writing this letter."
04-24-2013, 06:04 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,989
Originally Posted by UncleSam
I think most of us realize that the sequestration is a political tool ....
Yes, under President Nixon we put a man on the Moon. Under President Obama we drew our manhood on Mars.
... anything to post this Austin Powers clip.
04-24-2013, 06:34 AM
Works Every Weekend
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 737 ATL
Posts: 3,506
Sequestered today. So its Wednesday morning guitar time.
04-24-2013, 06:35 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,002
Originally Posted by Timbo
I'm in the top 3%, with 12 years to go, can I respond? 
We, the top 33%, have been screaming about the loss of our wide body flying for a long time. At least 10-15 years. We can do simple math. We understand that when Delta started to code share with Air France, and we cut our flying to Paris, while A/F bought a whole bunch of new 777's to fly to the States, it was not good for Delta Pilots. At one time, 20 years ago, Delta had 55 L10-11's. We don't have that many wide bodies now, after a huge merger!
But Richard knows he cannot compete with Emirates, dollar for dollar, flight for flight, due to their cheaper financing deals through the IMEX bank deals, and all their other cost advantages. They don't ever have to make money, they can (and will) flood any market with cheap, empty seats, and drive the US Carriers out.
Why do you think DALPA and Richard have been fighting this? And who do you think is hurt more when they cut Wide Body flying? Wide Body Pilots, (the top 33%, most of whom are in their mid 50's and still have 2-3 contracts to get through) or 717 pilots?
We all want more wide body flying. Now, how do you propose to force Delta to do it? Oh, and are you, in the bottom 66%, an ALPA PAC supporter? The azzhats in DC make the rules, we need to pay them to see things "Our Way". Sad, but that's what this is about.
We, the top 33%, have been screaming about the loss of our wide body flying for a long time. At least 10-15 years. We can do simple math. We understand that when Delta started to code share with Air France, and we cut our flying to Paris, while A/F bought a whole bunch of new 777's to fly to the States, it was not good for Delta Pilots. At one time, 20 years ago, Delta had 55 L10-11's. We don't have that many wide bodies now, after a huge merger!
But Richard knows he cannot compete with Emirates, dollar for dollar, flight for flight, due to their cheaper financing deals through the IMEX bank deals, and all their other cost advantages. They don't ever have to make money, they can (and will) flood any market with cheap, empty seats, and drive the US Carriers out.
Why do you think DALPA and Richard have been fighting this? And who do you think is hurt more when they cut Wide Body flying? Wide Body Pilots, (the top 33%, most of whom are in their mid 50's and still have 2-3 contracts to get through) or 717 pilots?
We all want more wide body flying. Now, how do you propose to force Delta to do it? Oh, and are you, in the bottom 66%, an ALPA PAC supporter? The azzhats in DC make the rules, we need to pay them to see things "Our Way". Sad, but that's what this is about.
BTW Top 3% at 53... not bad.
04-24-2013, 07:27 AM
Runs with scissors
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,722
Originally Posted by Eric Stratton
That doesn't appear to be correct at all unless you are looking at what appears to be WB pay. Then it's a little more correct.
BTW Top 3% at 53... not bad.
BTW Top 3% at 53... not bad.
It would be nice if I still had a retirement plan, and I was making $319/hr, instead of less than I was 8 years ago on the 757.
I'm only counting the 16 747's and 18 777's as a comparison to the 55 L10-11's we once had, for "Wide Body" pay purposes.
You can throw in what, another 21 767-400's and 33(?) A330's if you like, they pay a lot less, but throw them in and what do we have today?
A grand total of 88 Wide Bodies. Yipee...
The day before 9/11/2001 Delta had about 10,400 pilots on our seniority list, I think NW had about 7,500 back then (?). Today as a combined airline, we have what, about 11,500 or so. In effect, we have shrunken by an entire airline.
I think we all understand what's been going on here, but to AWM's point, it's not just the bottom 66% that are unhappy about it, and most of the top 33% still have 2-3 contracts to go. He sounds like he's trying to make it a Senior Guys screwing the Junior Gusy thing when it's not. Many of us Senior Dudes voted NO on that last one too, there was nothing in it for us. The pay raises were tiny and there was nothing much to replace our lost DB plans.
04-24-2013, 07:41 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,989
Originally Posted by Check Essential
Sequestered today. So its Wednesday morning guitar time.
Reminded me of a cover ... the Heartbreaker's just killed it.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 04-24-2013 at 07:52 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
