I have no idea why anybody is worried about "Hurting the company." Management will do that long before you get your licks in, as myself and 3500 of my closest buddies can verify. Sure lets buy'em an airplane...... They're still laughing about that.

I don't see anywhere that I posted the contract was a big win. The pay increases were below what I wanted. Originally I wanted a minimum of 18 percent up front. I expected that to get that would take a long hard fight. I did not like the small productivity changes. When I voted I looked at every aspect of the contract and what the options on both sides might be with a no vote. My initial vote was no. I changed it the last morning. I saw the productivity numbers at Delta verses other airlines that morning and spoke at length with one of the negotiators on the possible options opened to the company. As posted in the end I came to the conclusion that this was the best option for money and quality of life. The 3 year duration was the item that put me over to the yes side.
The negotiations that followed at other airlines have shown to me that my perception is right. The sad thing is that so far not a single airline has improved on what we accomplished and all signed longer term deals that will certainly hinder our negotiations next time. Management does not care how much they pay us. They only care about what their total block hour costs are relative to the competition. We are the gold standard for unions at the moment in that regard. Its hard to figure out how this forum can spin being number 1 into a epic failure.

P.S. When we started the process in 2007 of rebuilding from the 1113 contract my pay rate was 156 dollars an hour. The CPI inflation calculator shows I would need that rate from 07 to be 174 dollars an hour today to keep up with inflation. My actually rate today is 212 an hour on just basic pay. In addition since then retirement is up 2 percent and going up another percent in Jan. International pay increased, vacation pay increased, training pay increased, reserve pay increased and overtime went from 1.5 to 2 times the base rate. My overall pay is way beyond the inflation only raises quoted on the forum.

FWhateverIW,

Sailing is right (and I am far from a Company, or ALPA apologist). Money and scope improved under C2012. There are some fixes I would have liked to see that did not happen in Sections 1 and 23, but overall the points Sailing makes are valid.

I think the worst of the reserve changes are going to only be felt rarely. The Company can't use reserves THAT efficiently and a pilot always has the option of the Personal Drop, help from the CPO, or sick time (if run completely ragged / fatigued / sick). A PD in the middle of a three day period of availability usually creates three days to get things done. My family knows not to expect me to be around from mid May through September. That's the way it has been since 1993 (starting at the bottom three times and stagnation at Delta). If anything, capturing the 100 seat flying (it wasn't and isn't a given ... a 120+ seat type was already outsourced) drives the hiring that may finally result in reliably holding a line after 21 years of working as a professional pilot.

Speaking personally, I'll probably still bid weekends off reserve and take my chances with occasionally getting a really good trip that my seniority would not otherwise hold. Also, there are some winter months where reserve means maybe flying a trip and a half. It works out for most pilots. Paying the Company back over the Summer is fair JMHO.

Before Contract 2012, Delta's reserve pay lagged the industry and lagged what NWA had before our merger. Now we are generally industry standard. If we had kept the reserve unchanged, the result might have been .5% to 1% more pay for everyone. The Reps took a lot of heat for "improving pay for the junior pilots more than the senior pilots." Our Reps did the right thing by bringing our junior guys up to industry standard.

Finally hit the big time. We're headed for the Supreme Court


Supreme Court to hear case of disgruntled frequent flyer | Reuters

What is your opinion?

Without digging too deep into this, it appears the Supreme Court might be closing the door on a Plaintiff shopping forums to circumvent the proper Federal jurisdiction. IMHO there are a number of issues ripe for the Supreme Court to reassert Federal preemption. The State Courts have been allowing Federal immigration agreements to be used in civil cases and obviously this instant case would subject airlines to State and Local rules.

Without digging too deep, I agree.
That, and the conservative justices are always looking for an opportunity to slap around the Ninth Circuit a bit.
That legal community out there in San Francisco is out of control. Somebody needs to periodically remind them of the existence of the US Constitution.

What puzzled me when I read this is how it ended up in a California court. This guy and NWA were both from Minnesota.

Wasn't looking down on anyone, nor was I calling out every single "yes" voter on the last TA. The mentality I described may have played a role among some, but IMO its more of a factor when things get tough. When guys can't walk away, management knows that, and they smack a bottle of champaign against the bow of the USS Imtimidation and slide their trusty battleship into the water.

I see all sides of the TA debate and I realize that there were yes and no voters for various reasons. I thought at the time that the raise and other improvements were on the too small side especially considering the concessions given to get it. That's behind us though. One good thing about it all is that next time the pay rates across the industry are much higher and the differential much less than the last time.

And regardless of one's opinions on what we deserve or should fight for, etc. I would hope we could all agree that maxing out one's finances trying to live the life we may actually truly deserve but can't live any other way is a significant collective liability come negotiations time. In good times but especially in bad.

Sailing,

Thank you for your honest and detailed answer to my question.

It was either Ed Bastian or RA that recently said that the 717 deal was a once in a lifetime event and they had to get them. Based on that statement I think the company would of come back to the table in a hurry. Don't forget the company is who really wanted the contract to be wrapped up asap.

I think that we had leverage (something the company wanted) and we let it go.

Kind of amazing a "common law" argument is making it's way to the Supremes. I thought withdrawal of an offer is pretty basic, even Jimmy Buffett's contracts state "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone with a bad attitude." The Court of initial jurisdiction flatly stated the Plaintiff failed to state a claim.

The Plaintiff should not use access, provided to him as a result of Federal Law, to sustain a pattern of behavior did not for which he seeks to profit under a common law cause of action. More importantly, every local Court would establish a different standard, making an impossible mess for airlines to comply with. The "Good Faith" standard applied by the Circuit Court does not have a clear meaning. With 24 complaints and his constantly seeking compensation, did the Rabbi act in good faith? If the Rabbi had acted in good faith, then it can be reasonably presumed NW would have wanted to continue selling their services to the Plaintiff.

Just curious for those who know, does this Rabbi's church agree to let him use his professional title in the pursuit of monetary claims? The title is clearly being used to convey some greater authority or credibility. I did not read anywhere that he intends to donate the $5,000,000 plus other compensation he demands to his church, or charity.

http://www.vosizneias.com/88724/2011...rthwest-delta/Note in case a Rabbi wants to sue me - i'm no attorney and edited this from my phone, JMHO.