Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
07-05-2013 | 10:41 AM
Moderator
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
Once again Johnso is sounding like a corporate salesman and slanting the view. Three pages after he posted this, Superpilot told the real story.
This wasn't a guy just missing three trips with unverified sick with no doctor visit head cold, it was a guy with a hospital surgery and thus a ton of "verify"-worthy paperwork.
And YES HE DID get a call from the company! In another post Johnso slants his case again saying "Then he chose to call and verify it because he would exceed 100 hours of usage", while Superpilot tells the real story, " The Chief pilot called after 15 days consecutive out to ask if i was ok and if i was going to verify it."
It doesn't really matter which of the three triggers the CPO tells you caused him to call... either you get a call or you don't from the company asking "Hey what's up with your sick? can you explain it to me (we're here to help etc. if we think it doesn't sound fishy...)". He just posted that he did get a call.
Of course guys who get calls have "shown a pattern"! A pattern of USING THEIR SICK LEAVE, and not being as healthy as the guy sitting at a desk checking up on them. This excuse of "good faith, they showed a pattern of badness man!" is exactly akin to this type of thinking by police:
"Every one is treated the same under the laws, but we pull THESE guys over and frisk them a lot more because they show a suspicious pattern--they're black, they live in this ghetto, they were walking around and not in an office working, and they were younger than forty! CLEARLY a nefarious pattern that justifies us calling them to check on their so-called-sick-leave, err I mean jacking them up and frisking them."
The proof of "liberty" and a culture of freedom isn't in pointing to a few cases where someone was NOT violated, if you can ALSO point to folks who WERE violated! That is absolutely faulty logic that even a middle-school debate club wouldn't miss. This is a logic "truth" test-- it's true until you can find one example of falseness, and then it is FALSE, proven.
We've got cases of folks getting called at home in the first month for sick use, case closed. Pointing to a guy who had spinal surgery who "stayed up front with everything and kept in contact with the company", who got called at 15 days to verify his sick leave, is NOT proof that everything's hunky-dory...
Generally disappointed with the thinking from Johnso, starting to seriously think he may be Bill Lumberg...
This wasn't a guy just missing three trips with unverified sick with no doctor visit head cold, it was a guy with a hospital surgery and thus a ton of "verify"-worthy paperwork.
And YES HE DID get a call from the company! In another post Johnso slants his case again saying "Then he chose to call and verify it because he would exceed 100 hours of usage", while Superpilot tells the real story, " The Chief pilot called after 15 days consecutive out to ask if i was ok and if i was going to verify it."
It doesn't really matter which of the three triggers the CPO tells you caused him to call... either you get a call or you don't from the company asking "Hey what's up with your sick? can you explain it to me (we're here to help etc. if we think it doesn't sound fishy...)". He just posted that he did get a call.
Of course guys who get calls have "shown a pattern"! A pattern of USING THEIR SICK LEAVE, and not being as healthy as the guy sitting at a desk checking up on them. This excuse of "good faith, they showed a pattern of badness man!" is exactly akin to this type of thinking by police:
"Every one is treated the same under the laws, but we pull THESE guys over and frisk them a lot more because they show a suspicious pattern--they're black, they live in this ghetto, they were walking around and not in an office working, and they were younger than forty! CLEARLY a nefarious pattern that justifies us calling them to check on their so-called-sick-leave, err I mean jacking them up and frisking them."
The proof of "liberty" and a culture of freedom isn't in pointing to a few cases where someone was NOT violated, if you can ALSO point to folks who WERE violated! That is absolutely faulty logic that even a middle-school debate club wouldn't miss. This is a logic "truth" test-- it's true until you can find one example of falseness, and then it is FALSE, proven.
We've got cases of folks getting called at home in the first month for sick use, case closed. Pointing to a guy who had spinal surgery who "stayed up front with everything and kept in contact with the company", who got called at 15 days to verify his sick leave, is NOT proof that everything's hunky-dory...
Generally disappointed with the thinking from Johnso, starting to seriously think he may be Bill Lumberg...
Wow. Maybe you should switch to decaf. I apologize for getting some details incorrect. He was called. So the only thing I was incorrect about was that. Oh and by the way, the call was AFTER 15 days, which is PER the new policy. No good faith basis "loophole" used there. And they had NO IDEA why he was sick UNTIL he CHOSE to verify. He wasn't even required to do so because he had yet to reach 100 hours used. So your little line about it not being a head cold is IRRELEVANT.
That being said, explain what I'm attempting to sell? This is our sick policy. Over 60% of our pilot group voted YES. I don't need to "sell" anything. I'm sorry you're a bitter, angry, disgruntled person. If you don't like the contract, then I guess you'll just have to quit. Since Delta is SOOOO mean and DALPA sucks SOOOO bad then maybe you should just leave. Clearly non stop whining isn't correcting anything.
Last edited by johnso29; 07-05-2013 at 10:55 AM.
07-05-2013 | 10:51 AM
Moderator
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
What's funny is I nor alfa(since capn decided to bring him in) attack people unless we are attacked first. It's too bad that neither of you can really get into a debate without slinging insults. FTB and I often disagree, but we don't call each other names. We just debate.
And what funny math have I presented capn? What truth am I twisting? I'm sorry you got kicked off the whale in ANC. I'm sorry you can't hold SEA, LAX, or SLC anymore. I slid from 74% to 96% in 2 AEs several years ago. I was happy holding commutable 5 days. But then I slid to reserve. So now I'm on a different category. It's part of the job. You don't like it? Sorry. Change careers. Get a desk job. Then you can sleep in your own bed every night. Don't tell me it can't be done either. I've seen it happen. Stop being miserable and do something about it.
07-05-2013 | 10:52 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
By when? Did you think that they would bid out 1,000 spots by July 2013 for the 717 when they are coming at 3 a month for almost 30 months starting in late 2013 and ending in 2015 or 16? Seriously, you have been around this industry for a while, you know about aircraft deliveries and how they staff them. I don't believe for a second that you thought there would 1,000 spots by now. So why are you pretending that is what you believe or that you were lied to because that is not what happened? This all smacks a little of bizarro world here.
3 aircraft a month starting in September. 3 aircraft per month, 4 months in 2013 times 7 crews per jet. What number do you come up with for that? They have already bid out 145 crews (290 pilots) for the 717 so far. Is that more or less than your math exercise I just gave you?
It's really tired but true, you can have your own opinion but not your own facts.
3 aircraft a month starting in September. 3 aircraft per month, 4 months in 2013 times 7 crews per jet. What number do you come up with for that? They have already bid out 145 crews (290 pilots) for the 717 so far. Is that more or less than your math exercise I just gave you?
It's really tired but true, you can have your own opinion but not your own facts.
One number you once mentioned was a net 30-40 airplanes when everything was said and done. At 7 crews per jet (what happened to 10 or in some peoples posts 14 crews per jet? why not 5 like the 88?) but anyways 7 crews per jet that's 400-560 pilots given the net increase in ML that you once mentioned at 30-40 jets?
Now how much did we give back on productivity "improvements"?
Last edited by forgot to bid; 07-05-2013 at 11:09 AM.
07-05-2013 | 11:08 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
Let me dig this one out:
Quote 1
25JUL13
Richard Anderson [opening statement]
With the benefits achieved with our new pilot agreement, we have the flexibility we need to both accelerate our fleet restructuring and improve pilot productivity as we vary our capacity by season. The agreement enables us to up-gauge our domestic fleet by acquiring 717s and two-class regional jets which will replace more than 200 50-seat aircraft over the next few years.
Paul Jacobson [opening statement]
The retirement of the 50-seat regional jets is one of the single biggest opportunity costs we have. The up-gauging strategy will improve our efficiency by lowering our unit costs while simultaneously improving our product while maintaining our capacity discipline. Secondly, we are aligning our head count with our reduced capacity and recently had over 2,000 employees elect to participate in our voluntary early retirement program. These employees will retire by the end of the year with limited backfill, which will continue to result in improved productivity.
Ed Bastian [answering a question from UBS on CASM ex-fuel]
And I’d say the other thing, Kevin, there that we did not necessarily forecast or see coming as clearly is the opportunity we had with our pilots to do the contract early. It’s going to pay significant dividends over time as it will have a big cost return to it, not just in terms of improved productivity, but the ability to fairly substantially restructure the domestic fleet. But that those costs came in right away so that’s in our September guidance as well, and that was another big piece.
Quote 2
24OCT13
Operator
We’ll take our next question from Mary Jane Credeur with Bloomberg News.
Mary Jane Credeur - Bloomberg News
Hi, folks. Can you talk a little bit about how you’re going to afford that new pilot contract?
Richard Anderson
Hi, Mary Jane, this is Richard. Sorry for not saying hello. When you look at the overall value that we’re going to create as a result of unlocking the ability to refleet plus the productivity that has been built into that agreement, we’re confident that it will be an important part of our ability to get to unit cost over the next couple of years to improve our margins and our return on invested capital.
Glen Hauenstein
And, Mary Jane, this is Ed. One additional thing, we also reduced the profit sharing going forward and that’s an important part of helping to fund that cost growth.
Mary Jane Credeur - Bloomberg News
Sure. Okay. Thank you.
Operator
We’ll take our next question from...
Quote 1
25JUL13
Richard Anderson [opening statement]
With the benefits achieved with our new pilot agreement, we have the flexibility we need to both accelerate our fleet restructuring and improve pilot productivity as we vary our capacity by season. The agreement enables us to up-gauge our domestic fleet by acquiring 717s and two-class regional jets which will replace more than 200 50-seat aircraft over the next few years.
Paul Jacobson [opening statement]
The retirement of the 50-seat regional jets is one of the single biggest opportunity costs we have. The up-gauging strategy will improve our efficiency by lowering our unit costs while simultaneously improving our product while maintaining our capacity discipline. Secondly, we are aligning our head count with our reduced capacity and recently had over 2,000 employees elect to participate in our voluntary early retirement program. These employees will retire by the end of the year with limited backfill, which will continue to result in improved productivity.
Ed Bastian [answering a question from UBS on CASM ex-fuel]
And I’d say the other thing, Kevin, there that we did not necessarily forecast or see coming as clearly is the opportunity we had with our pilots to do the contract early. It’s going to pay significant dividends over time as it will have a big cost return to it, not just in terms of improved productivity, but the ability to fairly substantially restructure the domestic fleet. But that those costs came in right away so that’s in our September guidance as well, and that was another big piece.
24OCT13
Operator
We’ll take our next question from Mary Jane Credeur with Bloomberg News.
Mary Jane Credeur - Bloomberg News
Hi, folks. Can you talk a little bit about how you’re going to afford that new pilot contract?
Richard Anderson
Hi, Mary Jane, this is Richard. Sorry for not saying hello. When you look at the overall value that we’re going to create as a result of unlocking the ability to refleet plus the productivity that has been built into that agreement, we’re confident that it will be an important part of our ability to get to unit cost over the next couple of years to improve our margins and our return on invested capital.
Glen Hauenstein
And, Mary Jane, this is Ed. One additional thing, we also reduced the profit sharing going forward and that’s an important part of helping to fund that cost growth.
Mary Jane Credeur - Bloomberg News
Sure. Okay. Thank you.
Operator
We’ll take our next question from...
07-05-2013 | 11:14 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
From: 5-9 block, kill removing
Based on your incessant whining, I'd say both of you are gunning for most miserable person around.
What's funny is I nor alfa(since capn decided to bring him in) attack people unless we are attacked first. It's too bad that neither of you can really get into a debate without slinging insults. FTB and I often disagree, but we don't call each other names. We just debate.
And what funny math have I presented capn? What truth am I twisting? I'm sorry you got kicked off the whale in ANC. I'm sorry you can't hold SEA, LAX, or SLC anymore. I slid from 74% to 96% in 2 AEs several years ago. I was happy holding commutable 5 days. But then I slid to reserve. So now I'm on a different category. It's part of the job. You don't like it? Sorry. Change careers. Get a desk job. Then you can sleep in your own bed every night. Don't tell me it can't be done either. I've seen it happen. Stop being miserable and do something about it.
What's funny is I nor alfa(since capn decided to bring him in) attack people unless we are attacked first. It's too bad that neither of you can really get into a debate without slinging insults. FTB and I often disagree, but we don't call each other names. We just debate.
And what funny math have I presented capn? What truth am I twisting? I'm sorry you got kicked off the whale in ANC. I'm sorry you can't hold SEA, LAX, or SLC anymore. I slid from 74% to 96% in 2 AEs several years ago. I was happy holding commutable 5 days. But then I slid to reserve. So now I'm on a different category. It's part of the job. You don't like it? Sorry. Change careers. Get a desk job. Then you can sleep in your own bed every night. Don't tell me it can't be done either. I've seen it happen. Stop being miserable and do something about it.
You can't sell something as a peach and then blame the buyer for not knowing its a lemon.
07-05-2013 | 11:17 AM
Moderator
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
Come on Dude. Your point that 60% voted for it is specious. They voted for it because they were told hiring could be imminent, that this was a fleeting opportunity to get rid of RJs, etc etc. At least stipulate that the displacements were far from the 60%'s expectations and that the lack of hiring might have ****ed off a few folks.
You can't sell something as a peach and then blame the buyer for not knowing its a lemon.
You can't sell something as a peach and then blame the buyer for not knowing its a lemon.
07-05-2013 | 11:18 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,530
Likes: 0
Well....you see...it isn't a pattern. It's one sick call simply because he never called in well. 
He had to have spinal fusion surgery to repair bulging disks that were pressing into a nerve. The result of the bulging discs was chronic pain, & his arm going numb. So it was unverified sick time. Then he chose to call and verify it because he would exceed 100 hours of usage.
He had to have spinal fusion surgery to repair bulging disks that were pressing into a nerve. The result of the bulging discs was chronic pain, & his arm going numb. So it was unverified sick time. Then he chose to call and verify it because he would exceed 100 hours of usage.
07-05-2013 | 11:21 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
From: 5-9 block, kill removing
07-05-2013 | 11:23 AM
Moderator
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
I was being facetious about the "it sounds like a pattern" as you mentioned might be a reason for a call by the CP. The negotiators emphatically stated that there would be no "historical patterns" used by the company in calling people to verify or confirm. That's all I was getting at.
I think they said that call wouldn't be made based solely on usage. Or did they release literature stating otherwise?(Serious question BTW because I don't remember) Usage isn't a pattern. If you call in sick every Christmas for 6 years straight, would you expect a call?
07-05-2013 | 11:23 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,716
Likes: 0
Come on Dude. Your point that 60% voted for it is specious. They voted for it because they were told hiring could be imminent, that this was a fleeting opportunity to get rid of RJs, etc etc. At least stipulate that the displacements were far from the 60%'s expectations and that the lack of hiring might have ****ed off a few folks.
You can't sell something as a peach and then blame the buyer for not knowing its a lemon.
You can't sell something as a peach and then blame the buyer for not knowing its a lemon.
Its always "buyer beware," its up to us individual voters to read whats available, consult with others and than make a decision. I don't want to believe that people would vote yes, based solely on the premise that hiring would take place. Every voter has to decide for themselves if the contract meets the expectations that they have, than we have to live with the results.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
