![]() |
|
Originally Posted by shiznit
(Post 1619145)
Hmmm, you were not a Delta pilot then, so your version(revision) of history is a little off. DAL 757 pay was brought up to 767 pay, not the other way around.
You do make a good point though (by accident I'm sure!): Those "fools" at ALPA negotiated a pay rate for the likely 767 replacement (787) that is higher than 767-400/330 pay rates. 767 $219.62 737 $211.70 $7 and change. If you think that is widebody pay and not 757 more power to you. |
I have a friend who has conditional employment with Delta, but he's going to a Delta Pilot Review Board because of the Psych Eval. He's military, and has told me that several military guys from his interview group are going to this review board because of the Psych Eval. I've read past post regarding this. I know Delta loves military pilots who are becoming fewer in number these days. What is the likelihood that he'll fly for us? Seems more of a formality to me. He said that his interview went very well.
|
Originally Posted by gzsg
(Post 1619324)
2014 Pay Rates
767 $219.62 737 $211.70 $7 and change. If you think that is widebody pay and not 757 more power to you. gzsg, You are correct that the pay difference is minimal now, but the history of it is pretty complicated and mostly before my time. I believe that serious mid-contract gains were made as certain aircraft were added to the DAL fleet, specifically the 737NG and the 777. So if the 737's made a huge gain on WB pay in the past and that gain is still evident today, is that necessarily a bad thing? Scoop |
Originally Posted by Scoop
(Post 1619343)
gzsg,
You are correct that the pay difference is minimal now, but the history of it is pretty complicated and mostly before my time. I believe that serious mid-contract gains were made as certain aircraft were added to the DAL fleet, specifically the 737NG and the 777. So if the 737's made a huge gain on WB pay in the past and that gain is still evident today, is that necessarily a bad thing? Scoop The difference between ER and 737 pay is of less concern to me than the difference between the ER and the A330/765. Without taking the time to run the math again, I'm pretty sure it's the largest percentage difference in the fleet. |
Originally Posted by Scoop
(Post 1619280)
ACl,
I think you totally misinterpreted my post. That is exactly what I was saying - A future six year stop in hiring will inflict relatively mimimal career "pain" compared to what the '91, and 2000-2001' hires have already been through. Scoop |
Originally Posted by DALMD88FO
(Post 1619250)
Actually we bought part of Pan Am in 91 which brought pilots along with it in 91 and in 2001 we stopped hiring in July right after signing C2K which believe it or not gave some work rules to the company which allowed them to do more with less.
I do agree with what you are saying about hiring trends, however the management team in place at the time has a lot to do with the welfare of the company. The first RA followed by Leo and his cronies did not help our situation with some very poor business decision that the current RA is still having to fix (RJ's for one) In 1991, yes PanAm was bought and yes that was also the initial pause in hiring, but another "world" event deepened the effects of the stop in hiring. The take away is that both large hiring cycles lasted about six years and stopped for about six years each. Just food for thought at we go in to an expected cycle that is to double both of these. Call it a combination of corporate action and world events, but both large hiring cycles and the time frame in between them was about six years. For all intents and purposes, the 2007-2008 waive about 770 pilots had a burp in 2010 that broke the trend line, but its been about six years since the last major hiring cycle as well. Again corporate action and world events collided. the 2010 deviation was explained in the base visits. The difference last time is no one was furloughed. Its merely historical events and cycles that should be looked at as we move in to a second up contract (breaking historical trends btw) and the time frame we have until things may break. Its no more than using historical waves as one data point. It helps build perspective for all of us. |
Originally Posted by gzsg
(Post 1619324)
2014 Pay Rates
767 $219.62 737 $211.70 $7 and change. If you think that is widebody pay and not 757 more power to you. 2008: NWA . . 757 - $144.41 NWA . . 330 - $161.52 (+$17.11) DAL . . .757 - $159.98 (+$15.57) Using the rate YOU had at NWA for the 757, it definitely wasn't a WB payrate; I completely agree! The DAL contract certainly seemed to have the 757 pay in line with your historical definition of WB pay differential. |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 1619355)
I think we are talking past each other. I was referring to those on property and those already effected by those two events, not those yet on property.
No worries. I agree with your main point on the need to think strategically and also the fact that the music can stop at any moment. Scoop :) |
Originally Posted by nwaf16dude
(Post 1619352)
The difference between ER and 737 pay is of less concern to me than the difference between the ER and the A330/765. Without taking the time to run the math again, I'm pretty sure it's the largest percentage difference in the fleet.
|
Originally Posted by Karnak
(Post 1619146)
Paying down the debt is important. Making the stock "investment grade" is important. Paying the pension debt down ahead of schedule is important. Buying new aircraft to replace aging aircraft is important. Buying aircraft to grow is important.
The message I get from the MEC is that it's better to negotiate with a successful enterprise, than a money losing one. A brief glance at contract history might help you see that. Good luck! Or both? |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:41 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands