Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
07-07-2013 | 05:49 PM
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,263
Likes: 105
From: DAL 330
You mean, "came down to industry standard...?"
- ALV + 15? unsat
How many reserves so far have flown to that?
- 7 short calls (after we just negotiated from 8 to 6)? YGBKM
How many are sitting 7 SCs. I haven't been on reserve for a few months, so I honestly don't know.
- Yes, reserve guarantee pay increased...but at what cost? A massive majority of my DAL buds would much rather fly much less and make a little less...not be beaten like rented mules when on reserve (and NOT by choice). Of course, most of them also voted for POS12...oops.
Wouldn't we all like to work less and make more? Of course I am sure the doughnut holes would deliver something much much better just because they would demand it, right?
- Let's not forget the massive concession of tinkering with the summer bid period length--not a reserve issue per se...but a huge kick in the jimmy for us.
Please educate me how that has been a kick in the jimmy other than having to remember that it doesn't begin and end on the same date as the month... I certainly don't see it as any kind of concession
- ALV + 15? unsat
How many reserves so far have flown to that?
- 7 short calls (after we just negotiated from 8 to 6)? YGBKM
How many are sitting 7 SCs. I haven't been on reserve for a few months, so I honestly don't know.
- Yes, reserve guarantee pay increased...but at what cost? A massive majority of my DAL buds would much rather fly much less and make a little less...not be beaten like rented mules when on reserve (and NOT by choice). Of course, most of them also voted for POS12...oops.
Wouldn't we all like to work less and make more? Of course I am sure the doughnut holes would deliver something much much better just because they would demand it, right?
- Let's not forget the massive concession of tinkering with the summer bid period length--not a reserve issue per se...but a huge kick in the jimmy for us.
Please educate me how that has been a kick in the jimmy other than having to remember that it doesn't begin and end on the same date as the month... I certainly don't see it as any kind of concession
I think this is a bigger productivity concession than ALV + 15. We went from having to cover 31 days to 30 days in our most limiting months. This is a instant 3% gain in productivity. Lets say 10,000 pilots flying the line - this is like an extra 300 Pilots for the company.
Now - we made improvements in other areas of the contract that also have to be taken into account, but in my mind the 30 day summer months was the biggest single productivity increase.
As proof just look at what the company is saying about next year - March may now be the most limiting month as far as Pilots are concerned. No longer are July and August limiting.
I know guys are worried about ALV + 15, but I see that more as an individual pilot issue (guys flying a ton) than a huge productivity giveback. It is also important and yes it will have a negative productivity affect but in my opinion much smaller than the 30 day summer months.
Anyway we will know sure enough when we have some hard historical data to analyze - right now its mostly speculation and opinion. The above is just my opinion.
Scoop
Last edited by Scoop; 07-07-2013 at 06:23 PM.
07-07-2013 | 05:56 PM
Straight QOL, homie
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,202
Likes: 1
From: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
07-07-2013 | 06:05 PM
Da Hudge
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
07-07-2013 | 06:09 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,685
Likes: 0
From: "Prof" button manipulator
Sure it was a harsh assessment, but it needs to be harsh. The APA conducted a clown show for 6+ years and only changed when their contract was rejected, they were hours away from a federal injunction that could have bankrupted the union, and their bankruptcy claim was flying out the window for good. How much closer to disaster did they have to come to change their path?
US Airways and USAPA have conducted their clown show for 7+ years now and their only hope of redemption is latching on to the APA that in turn latched onto the Delta/United contracts. They have failed in every objective they set and they have not delivered a penny of benefits to their pilots.
Following a deal like we signed last year, you always have the charlatans come crawling out from under their rocks proclaiming "Vote for me, I will give you everything you want." They have no plan, they have no work ethic, they only know how to craft a simple seductive message that all your dreams will be fulfilled if you simply follow their siren song.
The DPA lawyer is a master at this type of propaganda and deception. He ruined the mechanics union at Northwest and got kicked out of there. He led the Flight Attendants union at Northwest to near ruin and got kicked out of there. He led the US Airways pilots on a wild goose chase and took $10 million from them and finally got kicked out of there. Compare his list of former clients to current clients and you will see a guy that has basically been fired from just about every labor job he had. He got rich and they just got poorer and poorer. Now he has found a new set of chumps in the DPA that believe his crap because they want to believe his crap. Who wouldn't want to hear that all your troubles will simply disappear with a simple fix? That's is why you see all those ads for miracle diet pills on TV. Some people don't want to work out more and eat less, they would rather just take a pill and have their troubles disappear.
So if I make a harsh assessment then it's because my time in this profession has a limited life span. The time that should have been the heart of my career was spent in the bankruptcy era. Poor me. But rather than feel sorry for myself I actually tried to work to help pull the pilots out of this pit and back closer to where we need to be. Unlike the Carl's of this world who lack the courage to actually take real responsibility for anything I had to deliver the hard message that there are no easy solutions there is only work and work and more work and that improvements are cumulative and not immediate. That got us 50+% above bankruptcy rates within years of exiting.
So yes I make a harsh assessment. If I have to suffer through the APA/USAPA clown show for years and years I will sacrifice hundreds of thousands of dollars that I will never recover. So will thousands of other Delta pilots. If I want to take that seductive easy message and kick it in the teeth it's only because I have seen the serial failures and urge people to resist the siren song and continue to follow the path that has led to success.
You say I am on a high horse and I say prove my assessment wrong. Show me how the APA/USAPA clown show is leading the industry out the bankruptcy era and I will agree with you and change my stance. So far I have seen nothing but BS and bluster from the DPA crowd and their charlatan lawyer. Their ideas need to be countered. I really don't feel like sitting around for the next 6 to 8 years watching my dues money pay for the DPA lawyers boat while I wallow in the muck. That is their record and it should be exposed for what it is. Hucksterism.
US Airways and USAPA have conducted their clown show for 7+ years now and their only hope of redemption is latching on to the APA that in turn latched onto the Delta/United contracts. They have failed in every objective they set and they have not delivered a penny of benefits to their pilots.
Following a deal like we signed last year, you always have the charlatans come crawling out from under their rocks proclaiming "Vote for me, I will give you everything you want." They have no plan, they have no work ethic, they only know how to craft a simple seductive message that all your dreams will be fulfilled if you simply follow their siren song.
The DPA lawyer is a master at this type of propaganda and deception. He ruined the mechanics union at Northwest and got kicked out of there. He led the Flight Attendants union at Northwest to near ruin and got kicked out of there. He led the US Airways pilots on a wild goose chase and took $10 million from them and finally got kicked out of there. Compare his list of former clients to current clients and you will see a guy that has basically been fired from just about every labor job he had. He got rich and they just got poorer and poorer. Now he has found a new set of chumps in the DPA that believe his crap because they want to believe his crap. Who wouldn't want to hear that all your troubles will simply disappear with a simple fix? That's is why you see all those ads for miracle diet pills on TV. Some people don't want to work out more and eat less, they would rather just take a pill and have their troubles disappear.
So if I make a harsh assessment then it's because my time in this profession has a limited life span. The time that should have been the heart of my career was spent in the bankruptcy era. Poor me. But rather than feel sorry for myself I actually tried to work to help pull the pilots out of this pit and back closer to where we need to be. Unlike the Carl's of this world who lack the courage to actually take real responsibility for anything I had to deliver the hard message that there are no easy solutions there is only work and work and more work and that improvements are cumulative and not immediate. That got us 50+% above bankruptcy rates within years of exiting.
So yes I make a harsh assessment. If I have to suffer through the APA/USAPA clown show for years and years I will sacrifice hundreds of thousands of dollars that I will never recover. So will thousands of other Delta pilots. If I want to take that seductive easy message and kick it in the teeth it's only because I have seen the serial failures and urge people to resist the siren song and continue to follow the path that has led to success.
You say I am on a high horse and I say prove my assessment wrong. Show me how the APA/USAPA clown show is leading the industry out the bankruptcy era and I will agree with you and change my stance. So far I have seen nothing but BS and bluster from the DPA crowd and their charlatan lawyer. Their ideas need to be countered. I really don't feel like sitting around for the next 6 to 8 years watching my dues money pay for the DPA lawyers boat while I wallow in the muck. That is their record and it should be exposed for what it is. Hucksterism.
GJ
07-07-2013 | 06:12 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,685
Likes: 0
From: "Prof" button manipulator
^^THIS!^^
USAPA was nothing other than a group of grown men/women, lacking integrity, "taking their toys and going home" after an awarded Seniority List, that both parties had agreed too. (Something about "binding" arbitration that the East pilots never quite understood?)
GJ
07-07-2013 | 06:14 PM
Straight QOL, homie
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,202
Likes: 1
From: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
07-07-2013 | 06:20 PM
Da Hudge
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
^^THIS!^^
USAPA was nothing other than a group of grown men/women, lacking integrity, "taking their toys and going home" after an awarded Seniority List, that both parties had agreed too. (Something about "binding" arbitration that the East pilots never quite understood?)
GJ
USAPA was nothing other than a group of grown men/women, lacking integrity, "taking their toys and going home" after an awarded Seniority List, that both parties had agreed too. (Something about "binding" arbitration that the East pilots never quite understood?)
GJ
I have no respect for them, but alfa using them as failure in his post over and over again is a logical fallacy. Their goal was never an industry leading contract or even a contract at all- only to get around an SLI.
07-07-2013 | 06:26 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,685
Likes: 0
From: "Prof" button manipulator
Purple,
Their opposition to ALPA isn't, and wasn't the reason why I stated their "lack of integrity".
Both sides, (AWA/USAir) conducted a corporate merger, and both contractually agreed to binding arbitration for determination of their Integrated Seniority List (ISL).
How unhappy were both sides prior to the Arbitrator's final ruling? They must not have been too unhappy, as they both felt ALPA was their best choice for a bargaining agent during Seniority List integration, right? (Otherwise, presumably, they would've started the USAPA drive prior, during, and after the seniority list award?)
Fast forward to a date "AFTER" the Arbitrator's award was published, and now all of a sudden the "Easties" feel as though they'd been wronged. (E.G. They didn't get what they'd thought, or wanted from the Arbitrator's award, so obviously it's ALPA's fault?)
Anyway, PURPLEDRANK, I you're not on my ignore list because I enjoy reading opposing views to a subject.
Good day, and enjoy the cold one.
GJ
Their opposition to ALPA isn't, and wasn't the reason why I stated their "lack of integrity".
Both sides, (AWA/USAir) conducted a corporate merger, and both contractually agreed to binding arbitration for determination of their Integrated Seniority List (ISL).
How unhappy were both sides prior to the Arbitrator's final ruling? They must not have been too unhappy, as they both felt ALPA was their best choice for a bargaining agent during Seniority List integration, right? (Otherwise, presumably, they would've started the USAPA drive prior, during, and after the seniority list award?)
Fast forward to a date "AFTER" the Arbitrator's award was published, and now all of a sudden the "Easties" feel as though they'd been wronged. (E.G. They didn't get what they'd thought, or wanted from the Arbitrator's award, so obviously it's ALPA's fault?
)Anyway, PURPLEDRANK, I you're not on my ignore list because I enjoy reading opposing views to a subject.
Good day, and enjoy the cold one.
GJ
07-07-2013 | 06:37 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
Wait a minute, Alfa.
Doesn't your argument have a flip side? Just like my daughters can't prove I wouldn't have gotten them clothes, or food, or taken them to school, when I said they had to get their act together (or else), I can't prove that management was going to offer the early retirement program, buy the 717's, and get rid of the RJ's. (I'll leave out the 14 hour limit on short call argument, because I don't think you are the one who claims that to be a contract improvement.)
But, my daughters have past performance as evidence to support their beliefs. They know that I have bought them clothes and food and taken them to school for their entire lives, no matter what they did.
Like them, I have evidence, too:
1.) Early Retirement Program:
The Company has offered an early retirement program before. Without being asked, they did it on their own. I've heard arguments that it is beneficial to them to smooth the retirements out over time instead of having everyone retire at once. Their communications to us often indicate that this is something they worry about.
Also, they offered an early retirement program to the majority of the other employee groups the previous year, while we curiously were missing amongst the participants.
2.) Acquisition of Boeing 717's:
The company has ordered airplanes without pilots agreeing to a contract before. In fact, I can't recall a single aircraft order that was contingent on pilots signing an agreement. Even if there has been such a case, I would venture to say that the vast majority of aircraft purchases occur without such an agreement. Normally, if an airline needs airplanes, they order them. That's what they do. Just like when parents needs to feed and clothe their kids and take them to school so as to properly raise them.
3.) Retirement of the 50 Seat RJ's:
You, and others, are going to have to correct me if I'm wrong on this one. Wasn't the company retiring 50 seater's before our agreement? Even if I'm mistaken, there have been many people on this board, and others who have shown how they weren't economical. From talking to them, I know passengers hate them to the point where they book their trips to avoid them.
So, to me, it's isn't such a stretch that the company would have been looking to retire them regardless of whether or not we had an agreement. If it's broke, unreliable, and/or the customers hate the product, it's time to get rid of it. That's simple business sense and our management team has proven themselves to be great businessmen.
So, there it is. Past performance and business sense is what leads me to believe that the company would have offered the early retirement program, bought the 717's, and found a way to retire the 50 seater's.
Do you have any evidence that leads you to believe that they wouldn't have done these things without us signing a contract?
No jabs or cheap shots intended. Since you seem to have inside information, and since you seem to be willing to talk, I sincerely just want to know what the thinking was behind accepting these items as negotiated items for the our pilot group.
Thanks in advance.
New K
Doesn't your argument have a flip side? Just like my daughters can't prove I wouldn't have gotten them clothes, or food, or taken them to school, when I said they had to get their act together (or else), I can't prove that management was going to offer the early retirement program, buy the 717's, and get rid of the RJ's. (I'll leave out the 14 hour limit on short call argument, because I don't think you are the one who claims that to be a contract improvement.)
But, my daughters have past performance as evidence to support their beliefs. They know that I have bought them clothes and food and taken them to school for their entire lives, no matter what they did.
Like them, I have evidence, too:
1.) Early Retirement Program:
The Company has offered an early retirement program before. Without being asked, they did it on their own. I've heard arguments that it is beneficial to them to smooth the retirements out over time instead of having everyone retire at once. Their communications to us often indicate that this is something they worry about.
Also, they offered an early retirement program to the majority of the other employee groups the previous year, while we curiously were missing amongst the participants.
2.) Acquisition of Boeing 717's:
The company has ordered airplanes without pilots agreeing to a contract before. In fact, I can't recall a single aircraft order that was contingent on pilots signing an agreement. Even if there has been such a case, I would venture to say that the vast majority of aircraft purchases occur without such an agreement. Normally, if an airline needs airplanes, they order them. That's what they do. Just like when parents needs to feed and clothe their kids and take them to school so as to properly raise them.
3.) Retirement of the 50 Seat RJ's:
You, and others, are going to have to correct me if I'm wrong on this one. Wasn't the company retiring 50 seater's before our agreement? Even if I'm mistaken, there have been many people on this board, and others who have shown how they weren't economical. From talking to them, I know passengers hate them to the point where they book their trips to avoid them.
So, to me, it's isn't such a stretch that the company would have been looking to retire them regardless of whether or not we had an agreement. If it's broke, unreliable, and/or the customers hate the product, it's time to get rid of it. That's simple business sense and our management team has proven themselves to be great businessmen.
So, there it is. Past performance and business sense is what leads me to believe that the company would have offered the early retirement program, bought the 717's, and found a way to retire the 50 seater's.
Do you have any evidence that leads you to believe that they wouldn't have done these things without us signing a contract?
No jabs or cheap shots intended. Since you seem to have inside information, and since you seem to be willing to talk, I sincerely just want to know what the thinking was behind accepting these items as negotiated items for the our pilot group.
Thanks in advance.
New K
Sioux City?
07-07-2013 | 06:38 PM
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,353
Likes: 54
From: 765A
Show me anywhere that Delta has pushed full automation all the time. In fact the FOM says we need to remain proficient in all levels of automation.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
