|
|
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1583363)
Pr
Jay, I may be the only active participant on this board who actually took the time to talk to J C Lawson about the error that he made. I told him he should be building bridges as we tried to do at ASA, not throwing political grenades. Delta pilots are an intelligent group of people. I only write these things to help them see the matter objectively, so that they may properly consider their political support and hold their elected representatives accountable when questions involving their employment proective provisions are decided. Bar, you seem to be an intelligent Delta pilot with a lot of insight but this is one area where the more you spew, the fewer minds "see" the matter the way you want them to. Keep it simple. Don't try to defend an indefensible position. What's done is done, and no amount of "behind the scenes" insight is going to inspire any former furloughed Delta pilot to exclaim.."yes, Bar is right..JC didn't stab us in the back, RJ pilots didn't replace us and enjoy a windfall of flight time at our expense..we should look in the mirror and blame ourselves, or at least blame DALPA." As classes fill with former RJ drivers and former furloughees get a chance to move to the left seat (still not there yet as of the last AE), we'll get a chance to discuss COMAIR at length and appreciate each others perspective. |
|
Originally Posted by CGfalconHerc
(Post 1583456)
RJ pilots didn't replace us and enjoy a windfall of flight time at our expense..
|
Originally Posted by DALMD88FO
(Post 1583360)
This is the train of thought that I do not understand. Profit sharing was negotiated during LOA 51 when the company was gutting our contract during the dark days. We negotiated it just for the days we are going through now, meaning making money hand over fist. It's been paid for once now we paid for it again in C2012.
We have once again fixed a company problem. The pilot group gave up a much larger percentage of pay and retirement than any other group at Delta. We negotiated profit sharing then the company decided to GIVE it the other employee groups. We knew that was going to happen, that's a history lesson to fortune telling. Not a big deal to the company either since they weren't making money so there wasn't a check. Now fast forward to today and the check is getting quite large and the company wants to take some of that money back. If they go and take it from the non-union employees (which they can do at any time), then they have to worry about them running out and unionizing. So they come to us and say if you give some of it back then you can have larger pay raises. I voted no to C2012. I felt that over a decade of giving back to the company that we had done our share and expected a contract that recognized those sacrifices. The union kept saying that if we didn't give the profit sharing back the 4-8-3-3 would have been even smaller raises. I don't think that even Delta pilots with our history of passing everything 60/40 would have passed that. On a positive note, I just watched Lee Moaks video about the pilot shortage. I actually feel he did a good job putting airline management on the spot about pay and benefits being the reason we are not attracting pilots in the US nowadays. I just showed everyone the math on how we benefit from converting a hard dollar value in to a percentage, (and that value gets even greater if you compound it off out of the 4% that we got 6 months ahead of the amendable date and all the increases in other areas). The guys in the lounge and the roadshows were very clear that the PS was converted in to pay rate, we all knew that math going into the vote. The math says: 4%, 8.5% 6 mo. later, 3%, 3% and 10%/20% in 2013 and beyond is more valuable than: 4%, 6.42% 6 mo. later, 3%, 3% and 15%/20%. It's just math, take the emotion out. The Company's opener was essentially 0% increases because CAL, UAL, AA, and LCC were lagging behind so VERY badly. Water under the bridge now, we are 13.5 months from openers already and it is time to come together and start showing unity to the Company. The DPA sh!t has to go away, it was divisive last time and was not helpful to making gains. A divided pilot group does not make the same improvements that a united one does. We have one, exclusive bargaining agent, ALPA. I don't negotiate as an individual, through another agent, or work by memo or company "policy". My MEC speaks for ME. My Negotiating Committee speaks for ME. P.S. I'm also very glad Pres. Moak is taking a harder line publicly about the "pilot shortage"(of pay and benefits). |
Originally Posted by shiznit
(Post 1583493)
I get it and agree that the PS plan was paid for via LOA 51. I disagree that it was "given back", we came out on the winning end of trading the plan to a pay rate percentage.
I just showed everyone the math on how we benefit from converting a hard dollar value in to a percentage, (and that value gets even greater if you compound it off out of the 4% that we got 6 months ahead of the amendable date and all the increases in other areas). The guys in the lounge and the roadshows were very clear that the PS was converted in to pay rate, we all knew that math going into the vote. The math says: 4%, 8.5% 6 mo. later, 3%, 3% and 10%/20% in 2013 and beyond is more valuable than: 4%, 6.42% 6 mo. later, 3%, 3% and 15%/20%. It's just math, take the emotion out. The Company's opener was essentially 0% increases because CAL, UAL, AA, and LCC were lagging behind so VERY badly. Water under the bridge now, we are 13.5 months from openers already and it is time to come together and start showing unity to the Company. The DPA sh!t has to go away, it was divisive last time and was not helpful to making gains. A divided pilot group does not make the same improvements that a united one does. We have one, exclusive bargaining agent, ALPA. I don't negotiate as an individual, through another agent, or work by memo or company "policy". My MEC speaks for ME. My Negotiating Committee speaks for ME. P.S. I'm also very glad Pres. Moak is taking a harder line publicly about the "pilot shortage"(of pay and benefits). I agree. I just desire more pay via less flying (restoration-NOW,not in 40 years), I wish for all Delta (incl. Connection) logo aircraft flown by Delta pilots (DCI outsourced pilots can fly <20 seaters), I pray for less JV/codeshare and aim for more retirement.:) I also dont appreciate excuses for why we cant achieve these markers or "sales jobs-Math" on sub-par performance like 4-8.5-3-3. Our money is better used elsewhere. Lets make it happen. TEN |
Originally Posted by CGfalconHerc
(Post 1583456)
Bar, you seem to be an intelligent Delta pilot with a lot of insight but this is one area where the more you spew, the fewer minds "see" the matter the way you want them to.
Keep it simple. Don't try to defend an indefensible position. What's done is done, and no amount of "behind the scenes" insight is going to inspire any former furloughed Delta pilot to exclaim.."yes, Bar is right..JC didn't stab us in the back, RJ pilots didn't replace us and enjoy a windfall of flight time at our expense..we should look in the mirror and blame ourselves, or at least blame DALPA." As classes fill with former RJ drivers and former furloughees get a chance to move to the left seat (still not there yet as of the last AE), we'll get a chance to discuss COMAIR at length and appreciate each others perspective. Bar, I'm in a running gunfight over on the Regional "Comair updates" board. Check out some of my posts and it might give a former RJ captain a little insight into a furloughed delta pilot's perspective. I figured out how to use "quote" but can't seem to move board to board. Now, back to morning java.. |
|
Originally Posted by sinca3
(Post 1583484)
I suggest the original, DEVIL AT MY HEELS. More factual and less Hollywood..... |
Incredible book!
|
SCOPE History at DAL (part-1)
Guys,
Lots of misconceptions about DAL SCOPE history in this thread. Below is the majority of an article on the history of SCOPE at DAL from 2009. I don't agree with 100% of its content, but it is very informative. Scoop Scope History at Delta There are so many myths about scope and Delta, it is important that every pilot at Delta understand the history of this contentious issue. ALPA has in its archives every contract ever signed between Delta management and ALPA. Researching all the way back to the earliest contracts up to and including the 1982 contract, there were no protections at all had management wanted to "code share" or outsource flying. Section 1 of our PWA from 1948 to 1982 basically said that ALPA is the bargaining agent for the pilots and will negotiate the pay, work rules, and benefits for all pilots . It was one long sentence,and that was all. It wasn't until after deregulation that Section 1 began to change! The 1986 Contract First time permissibility was granted to operate 70 seats or less flying was in the 1986 contract! Consider that was eight years after deregulation and our industry was evolving. In the '86 Contract, Section!-Recognition was a total of three pages. The agreement was that t Delta could not own or operate any airframes above 70 seats without merging them into the mainline. That left open the concept of 70 seats or less being flown by somebody else. Remember, scope was in its infancy and primarily a reaction to deregulation and the changing airline industry. Delta had few if any code-share partners (in current terms) and was feeding itself. Smaller, regional feed was also in its infancy. In those days, there were 110 RJs, and the biggest "feeder" airplane was the ATR72, or some* thing similar. The industry was evolving, and the MEC at the time made a determination that all flying above 70 seats belonged to mainline. Once again, in those days, all of that feed was turboprop; there were no RJs. The 1991 Contract The 1991 contract basically mirrored the 1986 agreement with some modifications to the language. but no change to the 70-seat flying. By the late '80s and early '90s, most major airline contracts contained some definitions of flying in the form of seats, power-plant type, and/or speed in order to retain traditional mainline flying. Scope language was getting more and more complex as the industry continued to evolve after deregulation, and unions reacted to these changes or made efforts to anticipate future feeder aircraft usage. In 1989, 50-seat jets were on the drawing board-manufacturer s actually referenced 50-seat limitation s in most "majors" contracts and designed airplanes around those restrictions. By the 1991 contract, the future of RJs was sealed and the horses were well outside the bam. What was changing was the type of airframe being used to feed all the majors. The scope section had grown from one sentencefor more than 30 years into three pages in 1986 and toeight pages in 1996, and it was renamed "Section 1*Recognition and Job Security." The 1996 Contract The 1996 contract was a concessionary contract. In 1992, after DL purchased PAA and the economy was in a recession (mild by today's standard), Delta was losing lots of money. RJ-50s were just beginning to arrive, and management was also threatening to rid itself of all 737- 200 aircraft and transfer the flying to regional carriers. The compromise was Sunshine, an Orlando-based operation where 737-200s were flown in leisure markets at a reduced pay scale. The scope section of that contract had grown to 13 pages and specifically allowed BAe-146 and AVRO RJ-85 airframes at ASA . This was a special carve-out provision since ASA bought those airframes and was permitted to do so under the 1991 Delta PWA. For the first time, a gross-weight reference was added to the PWA, but it only referenced freight-carrying aircraft, not passenger aircraft. The maximum permitted weight was 70K. Given the circumstances and the difficult negotiating environment at the time, the DAL MEC was in a defensive mode and not in a great bargaining position to aggressively manage the RJ flying. The 1996 contract is often blamed for allowing all the RJs, when in fact its permissibility really started back in 1986. The difference was that by 1996, regional jets were being delivered by the hundreds. Not only did the '96 contract not originate permitted RJ flying, it actually was the first contract that began to build the foundation for retaining traditional mainline flying. The early language created comparisons to mainline block hours and RJ block hours as well as introduced other metrics that could be used to make sure mainline would grow in comparison to outsourced flying. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:38 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands