Carl, No one in management or DALPA ever stated the contract was cost neutral. The statement often miss quoted here and by DPA from the company was that they expected the additional revenue generation from the fleet changes to offset the increased costs of the new contract. Total pilot expenses for the company go up substantially with this contract. 400 million the first year and more after that. It remains to be seen if the company can generate the additional revenue they plan since the fleet changes wont really start happening for another year. Regardless trying to tie revenue to the cost of the contract has no relevance. If they offered us all 1 million dollars a year because United and American went out of business and revenue soared would that also be a cost neutral contract? The total cost to Delta to crew their aircraft is going up substantially under this contract.
Your tirade against DALPA started the day the SLI award was made public. I tend to think there is a relationship.

I was here on this site for the merger. I don't recall NWA and DAL running in the meadows hand in hand prior to the SLI...

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3426/...f30e2797_o.jpg

and then all of a sudden going mad when it was released.

I would say it was heated here. There were a lot of issues. The you vs me was an issue. The SLI was. LM was. Future union leadership was. Flight ops direction was. Union motive was.

But after a while the you vs me and the SLI dissipated into the background not only here but on the line [may be not off line though] and people moved on.

But the other stuff festered. And it wasn't just DALN pilots who festered, it was DALS too. It was there before the merger and I know it was because my TOE out of JFK was nothing but anti-DALPA and anti-LM rants by the LCA and relief pilot in 2008. A good number of DALS pilots shared something in common with DALN and the DPA grew for a while. And grew very large in none other than ATL.

I think to say this is all SLI related isn't accurate.

You say this even though you know Mike Campbell (Delta management) said this prior to the TA being ratified: "The fleet changes provided by this agreement, coupled with the productivity and profit sharing changes, cover the investments in our employees."

And you know our DTW, MSP and SEA reps (aka DALPA) specifically stated that this TA would be cost neutral. It was all in writing, yet you say nobody from management or DALPA ever said it. Why do you do this? Do you think it enhances your credibility? Are you just forgetful?

Carl

Amazing. It's almost as if you're trying to prove me correct when I posted this:

Carl

We are the only employee group not back to pre-bankruptcy wages not counting inflation. Every single employee that we work with other than us is back to where they were. Think about that.

There was also the investors call after ratification where EB pretty much said the same thing. Cost neutral.

Da Nile, its more than just a river in Egypt.

Sailing,

You're correct that the "cost neutral" comments from management are being misrepresented. The comments/fabrications from the former council 20 reps were addressed during the ratification process. Your recollection of what was said and the context it was stated is accurate.


On this we disagree. Carl wrote this back in 2008 after the SLI was public - his attitude change came slightly later:

None of those groups saw the massive increases in pay we saw in the early 2000's. If you compare our contract wages to what other employees are paid at Delta relative to the industry today we are ahead of every group except perhaps the mechanics who would be about the same as we are. Our flight attendants as a example are paid substantially less then American and our far more productive. They are paid 20 percent less then SW's hourly rate and not far from them in productivity. Delta flight attendants were the most productive of the legacy airlines in 2011. In addition they took substantial cuts in many areas including freezing their retirement plan with no follow on retirement at all for almost 4 years. Today they get something like 6 percent into a DC type plan. All the other employees saw the same increases in health care and other costs they we took. A 300 dollar a month increase in health care premiums has a lot more impact on a employee taking home 1600 dollars a month then a pilot.
Overall Delta's non pilot employee costs are at best industry average. If you count in the fact Delta was able to outsource many of those jobs the costs are probably well below industry average. We are industry leading. If you tried to use a argument about pilot costs verses other employee costs at Delta before the NMB you would look very foolish.

How do you reconcile this post of mine from 2008 with yours and your fellow former DALPA admins that I was only capable of hate, division, emotional tirades, etc etc?

Carl