Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
09-05-2013 | 01:17 PM
Moderator
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
09-05-2013 | 01:21 PM
Moderator
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
Exactly. So tell me why DPA is better. Back it up with facts. Here are my facts about DPA. Straight from the constitution.
-2.25% dues automatically implemented during Sec 6, early openers, bankruptcy, & mergers.
-Higher Flight Pay Loss then ALPA
Then these facts to follow:
-A law firm that was FIRED by USAPA.
-A $1 million line of credit that Delta pilots will HAVE to pay back, and no one has told us the interest rates.
-No ability to lobby for itself, and requiring CAPA to do so on their behalf.
That's a good start.
-2.25% dues automatically implemented during Sec 6, early openers, bankruptcy, & mergers.
-Higher Flight Pay Loss then ALPA
Then these facts to follow:
-A law firm that was FIRED by USAPA.
-A $1 million line of credit that Delta pilots will HAVE to pay back, and no one has told us the interest rates.
-No ability to lobby for itself, and requiring CAPA to do so on their behalf.
That's a good start.
09-05-2013 | 02:00 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Question for the moderator(s):
Some time ago (a year?) it was decided to start a DALPA vs DPA thread and posts on that subject were encouraged to be posted there. Any which showed up on the "Latest & Greatest" thread were manually moved there by the moderators.
So why are you now tolerating the DALPA vs DPA debate on the "Latest & Greatest" thread ad nauseum?
Some time ago (a year?) it was decided to start a DALPA vs DPA thread and posts on that subject were encouraged to be posted there. Any which showed up on the "Latest & Greatest" thread were manually moved there by the moderators.
So why are you now tolerating the DALPA vs DPA debate on the "Latest & Greatest" thread ad nauseum?
09-05-2013 | 02:02 PM
Doing Nothing
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,316
Likes: 0
Question for the moderator(s):
Some time ago (a year?) it was decided to start a DALPA vs DPA thread and posts on that subject were encouraged to be posted there. Any which showed up on the "Latest & Greatest" thread were manually moved there by the moderators.
So why are you now tolerating the DALPA vs DPA debate on the "Latest & Greatest" thread ad nauseum?
Some time ago (a year?) it was decided to start a DALPA vs DPA thread and posts on that subject were encouraged to be posted there. Any which showed up on the "Latest & Greatest" thread were manually moved there by the moderators.
So why are you now tolerating the DALPA vs DPA debate on the "Latest & Greatest" thread ad nauseum?
09-05-2013 | 02:07 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
09-05-2013 | 02:18 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
I still don't see your point in bringing up the number of passenger seats. Again, WhoGAS about that except that until we have a rational pay system that ignores the kind of airplanes that management buys (which are smaller than any super premium airplanes) then we as a group will continue to be paid less and less over the course of our careers. MY point is that the number of passenger seats is something we have ZERO control over so why worry about it?
09-05-2013 | 02:23 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 5,583
Likes: 326
No kidding. Over there, they can't reserve the jumpseat. They just have to show up and hope they are the most senior 15 minutes prior to departure. They should do it like us, but they feel our way violates seniority even though our way is more convenient, less stressful, and easier to plan around. As a commuter, I am grateful for our jumpseat policy.
09-05-2013 | 02:32 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
From: 777 Sim Instructor
No kidding. Over there, they can't reserve the jumpseat. They just have to show up and hope they are the most senior 15 minutes prior to departure. They should do it like us, but they feel our way violates seniority even though our way is more convenient, less stressful, and easier to plan around. As a commuter, I am grateful for our jumpseat policy.
09-05-2013 | 02:53 PM
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
January 19, 2011
DPA and Contract 2013
The Delta Pilot Working Agreement (PWA) is not amendable until December 31st, 2012, a full 710 days away from the date of this article. Considering no ALPA contract in recent memory has been signed on its amendable date, history suggests that this contract will also not be resolved any earlier this time around under the current representation. In fact, under the current representation, one could expect that we will not achieve a new contract for up to several years after the amendable date. Of course, this contract could be different, but history says it will not be.
From another angle, DPA wants to be ready to open 270 days prior to the amendable date as the PWA allows. This early opener can occur no earlier than April 2012. Our aggressive goal of completing the representation election by May 2011 allows for an extra 270 days to prepare for the opener. As you can clearly see, there is more than enough time to meet all of these benchmarks if we all do our part over the next several months.
DPA and Contract 2013
The Delta Pilot Working Agreement (PWA) is not amendable until December 31st, 2012, a full 710 days away from the date of this article. Considering no ALPA contract in recent memory has been signed on its amendable date, history suggests that this contract will also not be resolved any earlier this time around under the current representation. In fact, under the current representation, one could expect that we will not achieve a new contract for up to several years after the amendable date. Of course, this contract could be different, but history says it will not be.
From another angle, DPA wants to be ready to open 270 days prior to the amendable date as the PWA allows. This early opener can occur no earlier than April 2012. Our aggressive goal of completing the representation election by May 2011 allows for an extra 270 days to prepare for the opener. As you can clearly see, there is more than enough time to meet all of these benchmarks if we all do our part over the next several months.
09-05-2013 | 02:54 PM
Mother’s finest
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 311
Likes: 8
From: 220A
I began writing a response to your entire post and it was getting way too long. 
Before I go off the deep end here, maybe I can get you to consider something. Ok, two things:
#1: Arbitrators and their type (lawyers and judges) look at most things by who got, or who will get financially harmed. You can argue that you deserve Christmas off and your pick of the trips with all the great layovers all you want, but if it isn't costing you any money, they don't care.
#2: With #1 in mind, and you wanting a pay system where all captains get paid captain pay (with longevity) and all first officers get paid first office pay (with longevity), are you not putting in a system where both pilot groups have the same career expectations? (Career expectations to arbitrators means, how much money did you expect to make over your career.)
Are you not putting in a system where both pilot groups are all in the same category and class? (Captain & First Officer pay without aircraft consideration means you have just those two categories, right?)
Are you not putting in a system where longevity is already accounted for? (If a 20 year captain will make more money in his 21st year, and then even more in his 22nd year, no matter what, then as an arbitrator, I don't have to account for him stagnating later on because I put him under someone on the list who has less longevity, right?)
With these things in mind, if we were going to a captain pay and first officer pay system, if we merged with Alaska, Jet Blue, Spirit, or Hawaiian, why wouldn't an arbitrator just put in a straight ratio list from top to bottom? (Actually, for reasons I won't get into, we might even get less than a straight ratio list.)
Geeze. It turned long, anyway. Sorry.
Before I go off the deep end here, maybe I can get you to consider something. Ok, two things:
#1: Arbitrators and their type (lawyers and judges) look at most things by who got, or who will get financially harmed. You can argue that you deserve Christmas off and your pick of the trips with all the great layovers all you want, but if it isn't costing you any money, they don't care.
#2: With #1 in mind, and you wanting a pay system where all captains get paid captain pay (with longevity) and all first officers get paid first office pay (with longevity), are you not putting in a system where both pilot groups have the same career expectations? (Career expectations to arbitrators means, how much money did you expect to make over your career.)
Are you not putting in a system where both pilot groups are all in the same category and class? (Captain & First Officer pay without aircraft consideration means you have just those two categories, right?)
Are you not putting in a system where longevity is already accounted for? (If a 20 year captain will make more money in his 21st year, and then even more in his 22nd year, no matter what, then as an arbitrator, I don't have to account for him stagnating later on because I put him under someone on the list who has less longevity, right?)
With these things in mind, if we were going to a captain pay and first officer pay system, if we merged with Alaska, Jet Blue, Spirit, or Hawaiian, why wouldn't an arbitrator just put in a straight ratio list from top to bottom? (Actually, for reasons I won't get into, we might even get less than a straight ratio list.)
Geeze. It turned long, anyway. Sorry.
Instead, I'll play devil's advocate and assume yes, it is harmful to our pilot group to have the 737-9 and A321 pay the same as a 75/76 in the event of a merger with Alaska (or Jetblue/Spirit etc if you prefer). In that case, since we are just about the only carrier out there with MD-88s and one of the few with 717s, shouldn't we immediately begin petitioning the company to make any potential common types in a merger, such as the 73 and the 320 placed at the absolute bottom of our pay scale? If we as a union/company put pay rates on the M88 and 717 $20 per hour above any other narrowbody, wont we be able to prove financial damage IAW your logic above? That way we get to ratio anyone we would even theoretically merge with (except HAL with their 717s) way down at the bottom portions of our stovepiped list vs the upper portions of our stovepiped narrowbody list.
For that matter, shouldn't we also start demanding that the M-88 and 717 pay MORE than the 777/747 so that even if we have another merger with a widebody carrier they won't have access to the top regions of our seniority list?
Also went a bit long, thanks for the discussion!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
