Originally Posted by bluejuice71 (Post 1662243)

+10000000

It's also amazing to me how some guys are so detached from their careers. Just flew with a guy that had no clue about the recent LOA. When I told him we were going to get 5:15 a day, he couldn't believe it! I couldn't believe how he wasn't staying informed about his career on a most basic level. Pretty scary.

Originally Posted by NERD (Post 1662153)

At that ATL PUB tonight. Donatelli speaks like a true blue collar union guy. Nothing much new said, but I'll give him time. That being said, I'm disappointed in our lack of PAC contributions. For our total payroll its embarrassing. All they are asking for is $5 per pay period and we have less than 20% contributing . Quit being so f@@@#$%g cheap! I've been contributing since being a newhire over 18 years ago. Get over your political bias and realize they only donate to pro pilot politicians, R or D. You can still donate to other PACs that support your liberal or conservative issues.

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44 (Post 1662248)

We don't need guys like that. I believe that not thinking about the job outside of work is healthy, but we have a lot of down time at work to keep up on current issues. It bothers me that we have guys that care this little.

Originally Posted by TheManager (Post 1662204)

A historian please. How much did we get for agreeing to PBS?

Originally Posted by FrankCobretti (Post 1662255)

I was there, too. Had I known you were there, I'd have ambled over and said hi.

Originally Posted by Herkflyr (Post 1662262)

We did not get anything--it was agreed to as part of our original concessions in 2004 (LOA 46) that we hoped would have helped the company stave off BK.

That said, while PBS certainly enables a lot more efficiency for the company (which is why all airlines want it so much) depending on the implementation it can be a very positive--or negative--thing. At DAL we have done it right for nearly nine years, for numerous reasons, and even though we agreed to it for onerous reasons, the end result has been positive.

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1662268)

You'd known if I was there.

http://sadderbutwiser.files.wordpres...errell-usa.jpg

Originally Posted by Herkflyr (Post 1662262)

We did not get anything--it was agreed to as part of our original concessions in 2004 (LOA 46) that we hoped would have helped the company stave off BK.

That said, while PBS certainly enables a lot more efficiency for the company (which is why all airlines want it so much) depending on the implementation it can be a very positive--or negative--thing. At DAL we have done it right for nearly nine years, for numerous reasons, and even though we agreed to it for onerous reasons, the end result has been positive.

Originally Posted by TheManager (Post 1662315)

So, let's say that SWA entices their pilots with a 35% raise over the term of their next contract to except PBS.

How would that effect your bottom line in regards to compensation for for out next contract.

BTW, it is rumored that FDX is also offering a similar number to secure the same acceptance for PBS there.