LivingTheDream

Here's the problem... we gave up stuff to get that profit sharing (pay increase)... then we gave up the profit sharing (past pay increase) to get the current pay increase... so we gave up stuff twice to get one pay increase... not a good plan.

sailingfun

The company sustained hiring a 100 pilots a month with fewer sims in the past. They will do fine and contract where needed. No help from us required.

Free Mason

Yes, the Association did during the road shows. It was about a 2.3% raise or about ~~ 40-43 million. Its a fixed number. As the profit sharing change was below 2.5 and the 33% reduction in profit sharing on a 2.5 billion dollar profit and below is a hard number; IE the 30-43 million dollar number does not change as profits go up. Any profit below 2.5 billion means the rate for reduction in profit sharing pays off. Anything above 2.5 means its effectively equal. Do not forget to add the compounding raises on that initial rate change for the profit sharing change either. In the long run it actually will put more cash in your pocket.

Check Essential

Timbo for MEC Chairman !!

Alan Shore

I agree fully with the negatives of giving up profit sharing, particularly in such profitable times. What irks me the most is that rich folks (Denny and I notwithstanding) love to promise you a share of future riches and spoils, e.g., profit sharing while we were in BK, but then resent the hell out of actually having to make good on that promise when the time comes, e.g., Wall Street: "You're giving how much of your profit to employees??!!"

That said, this year's 3% increase in pay rates was a net increase of 3%, and not further offset by the reduction in profit sharing.

Timbo

You know, when we were debating LOA 46 and 51, many of us were screaming for a "Snap Back" clause to be included.

Of course we were going to give up pay/benefits, to help save Delta, and when that ass-clown Dui Parker was trying to buy Delta, we showed up in force to, "Keep Delta MY Delta", all we asked was that, once things turned around, we would get it back.

The answer I kept getting from our MEC was, "No one will give us exit financing if we have a snap back clause in the contract..."

Um...but you never even asked for it!

We gave up 42% in pay, for how many years now, and BILLIONS in DB plan elimination, yet what have we gotten back? We are not yet anywhere near our 2004 pay rates, and we are not anywhere near recovering our $4 Billion in DB pension money.

It really, really, really pizzes me off when RA and Ed talk about returning (our) money to investors, when the Delta Pilots were the biggest "Investors", yet have received very little return on that investment. Ed and Richard have over 400,000 shares, each, so they are loving the stock price run up, of course. Every time they talk about sharing the wealth with "Investors" they are actually talking about sharing our sacrifices with...

THEMSELVES.

BTW, how much of a pay cut did Ed contribute when we were in bankruptcy?

And has he been 'made whole'?

Yeah...

Dorfman

GZSG is one of the main mouth pieces for DPA. He has become bored on the alternative to the ALPA web site and has come here to troll. If you quit feeding him he may go away.

Gzsg please refrain from your trolling or take it to the DPA thread there are pro and con opinions on this board but thankfully it has not degraded to the cesspool that is the other forum.

Wilbur Wright

I agree, but there were also fewer fleet types. There was a lot less cascading when an L10ll captain retired so I wonder how that plays into the equation? I think Timbo's idea of paying everyone 747/777 rates would fix the problem. A more realistic aid would be pay banding.

My biggest concern about pay banding is the transition. The guys currently on the aircraft at the top of the band lose out. If Timbo and Carl get 10% rate increases and they band the 765/330 with the big Boeings, they'll justifiably feel cheated.

But what really worries me is that if the WBs are banded, Timbo will downbid to the A330 to take my Barcelona and Rome trips.

gzsg

The above quote is spot on. Everyone should copy and keep it.

Some will argue the upcoming training can be accomplished and there is no way. Management will want pay banding (see UAL and AA) and say that if they don't get that and more non seniority list instructors they will not be able to grow.

"Do you not want to grow" "Do you not want to make more profits"

Some here will say the upcoming training can be done.

Consider that each retirement results in 6 new initial training events. And 700 pilots retire, that is 4200 initial training events in 12 months.

In my experience it will be more like 9-12 initials for each retirement.

You can't have 8 pilot bases and 9 fleets or more. Who is going to fly the line? The sim time is already booked.

How long does it take to qualify a new instructor? 10 minutes or 10 weeks?

gzsg

Excellent post! You said it all.

Richard has over 2.7 millions shares and counting. Ken Rogers can give you the exact number.