Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Subscribe
11982  12482  12882  12932  12972  12978  12979  12980  12981  12982  12983  12984  12985  12986  12992  13032  13082  13482  13982 
Page 12982 of 20173
Go to
Quote: Since bigger HAS to pay more... and if all things were equal, you have to be in the top 500 at DAL to even throw bags on a 777/747 because we have 34 of them... total... So you can look forward to holding those airplanes when you turn 63 or so... of course you will be on reserve, but our reserve system is pretty good... (I am writing this on SC) But I'll bet that on any given day UAL has 50 of 'em welded to the jetways at IAD...

My point is that basing our pay on aircraft size... something which we have zero input into.. is the ultimate definition of stupidity. Fortunately I was hired at the end of a nice wave, so it is not a worry of mine, but if I were young and junior, I would be ****ed off about this propensity to pay based on some retarded "productivity" metric. Best of luck brother. At least there will be a lot of movement in the coming years..... I guess you have to figure out where you will be when the music stops.. and it always does.
T;

I'll agree, we do need more 777s.

UAL has combined their pay in a banded system 747, 777, 787, 764. Not exactly a seniority based system, but probably close. However, if all you want to do is fly narrowbodies for max pay, your arch-nemesis kitty sacrificers comes to mind.
Quote: I'm with Tsquare on this, and look no further than the 149/160 seat MD-88/90 pay to the 320/319 and 737/738 and of course that's on the lower end of the spectrum.

Btw, there was a rumor more seats are coming to the 90s?
FTB;

I understand how it got that way, I don't understand why it is still that way.
Quote: I don't concede that you are right, but let's assume you are and we need another kind of pay system. What kind of pay system do you envision and how do we get there?

Keep in mind with any new pay system, the overall payroll will have to stay the same. Delta is not going to pay more for it's pilots because we have seniority based pay. You can't magically increase the number of pilots who are getting 777/747 pay. For every pilot that gets more money in a new system, another pilot will be getting less.
So putting the methodology aside for a moment. You believe that having the biggest airplane pay more is the best way to go? Really? You must be a) young, and b) senior.
Quote: T;

I'll agree, we do need more 777s.

UAL has combined their pay in a banded system 747, 777, 787, 764. Not exactly a seniority based system, but probably close. However, if all you want to do is fly narrowbodies for max pay, your arch-nemesis kitty sacrificers comes to mind.

We need more 777s if we are going to maintain the same pay methodology in order to get more people more money by the time they retire. That is what it is all about. But the inconvenient truth is that DAL management makes those decisions. All on their own. With ZERO input from us. Draw your own conclusions about where things will go, but to me, it ain't rocket surgery.

UAl is taking the first step. and IMHO, it is the right one. I would LOVE to see a new hire career earnings projection based on retirements and current fleets.... It will be eye watering.
Quote: We need more 777s if we are going to maintain the same pay methodology in order to get more people more money by the time they retire. That is what it is all about. But the inconvenient truth is that DAL management makes those decisions. All on their own. With ZERO input from us. Draw your own conclusions about where things will go, but to me, it ain't rocket surgery.

UAl is taking the first step. and IMHO, it is the right one. I would LOVE to see a new hire career earnings projection based on retirements and current fleets.... It will be eye watering.
You are right, we dont make the fleet choices. However, when I see multiple UAL 747s parked at a place we fly one 777 to because (theoretically) that is all the traffic the destination will bear, I feel like they are either losing their butts or we are under-serving...I don't know which is more true, probably both and maybe neither.

The inflexibility of a big fleet of widebodies is either a cash cow when times are good or a money pit when they aren't. I honestly can't make a judgement on which is the best overall fleet plan. I can tell you what I want, but that is not necessarily best for corporate health.

At this point, like you, I'm married to DAL come what may. I was at the other place and progression was rapid until it wasn't. When I left, I could hold 737A or 777B. If I had stayed there, there was a point when I could have held neither.

As to the pay banding, longevity pay, or other schemes, I'm just not sold on decoupling pay for productivity. The 747 IMO should pay more than the 777. I'm not convinced the 777 should pay more than all 330's. FTB has already touched on the stupidity of our narrowbody pay discrepancies.

Retirement planning in the hands of the individual is also a mixed bag. Some folks are good with it, others don't understand how to plan for it. Its a tragedy in the classic sense.
Well the MEC just put out a memo confirming that dividend deduction comes after our profit sharing is calculated, so that's a good thing.

Any bets on Caplinger putting out a 10 paragraph long rant in a week or so on how the dividends are going to take more from our profit sharing? I've gotten to the point now where I'm almost giddy opening his emails.
Quote: We definitely need more "premium" widebodies, however the 330 has the pax carrying and most of the freight carrying capability of the 777 (freaking stupid it pays the same as the 767-400 and not the 777), just without the ginormous fuel tanks.

However, even if you include the megapoodle, we're still way in the negative compared to UA and the new AA in regard to that sort of lift.
Yeah, but good thing there's a fancy rest area which allows you to sit and watch movies before you have to land the plane.
Quote: You are right, we dont make the fleet choices. However, when I see multiple UAL 747s parked at a place we fly one 777 to because (theoretically) that is all the traffic the destination will bear, I feel like they are either losing their butts or we are under-serving...I don't know which is more true, probably both and maybe neither.

The inflexibility of a big fleet of widebodies is either a cash cow when times are good or a money pit when they aren't. I honestly can't make a judgement on which is the best overall fleet plan. I can tell you what I want, but that is not necessarily best for corporate health.

At this point, like you, I'm married to DAL come what may. I was at the other place and progression was rapid until it wasn't. When I left, I could hold 737A or 777B. If I had stayed there, there was a point when I could have held neither.

As to the pay banding, longevity pay, or other schemes, I'm just not sold on decoupling pay for productivity. The 747 IMO should pay more than the 777. I'm not convinced the 777 should pay more than all 330's. FTB has already touched on the stupidity of our narrowbody pay discrepancies.

Retirement planning in the hands of the individual is also a mixed bag. Some folks are good with it, others don't understand how to plan for it. Its a tragedy in the classic sense.
I can't argue your logic vis-a-vis having a lot of big airplanes when times are good etc etc... THAT is management's job to sort out. And so far, our team has done a great job. As far as decoupling pay, I am sure nothing I can say is gonna change your mind, and frankly I am growing weary of trying. (although I am not gonna stop whenever the opportunity to say I told you so presents itself) I have had a fairly fortunate career. I am sitting in my retirement seat and I will be 53 this summer. I couldn't care less about the 747/777/330... well maybe I will go fly the 2x4 someday.. but that's it. So my point is that I have no dog in the fight other than leaving a better career than I found. We can still make sure that the Ninjas like Carl continue to benefit all alone, and that those like him that happened to be in the right place at the right time are handsomely rewarded... or.. we can pursue alternate methodologies. Either way, doesn't affect me one way or the other. I just think it is a shame that misplaced greed (and that is what it boils down to) takes precedence over what would be better for the group going forward.
Quote: Well the MEC just put out a memo confirming that dividend deduction comes after our profit sharing is calculated, so that's a good thing.

Any bets on Caplinger putting out a 10 paragraph long rant in a week or so on how the dividends are going to take more from our profit sharing? I've gotten to the point now where I'm almost giddy opening his emails.
Caplinger still around?
Quote: We need more 777s if we are going to maintain the same pay methodology in order to get more people more money by the time they retire. That is what it is all about. But the inconvenient truth is that DAL management makes those decisions. All on their own. With ZERO input from us. Draw your own conclusions about where things will go, but to me, it ain't rocket surgery.

UAl is taking the first step. and IMHO, it is the right one. I would LOVE to see a new hire career earnings projection based on retirements and current fleets.... It will be eye watering.
I'll be sure to remember that bolded part next time we're negotiating a TA.

(FYI I agree with your statement)
11982  12482  12882  12932  12972  12978  12979  12980  12981  12982  12983  12984  12985  12986  12992  13032  13082  13482  13982 
Page 12982 of 20173
Go to