Airline Pilot Central Forums - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)

- - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/36912-any-latest-greatest-about-delta.html)

"For sure, if you want to get the most value out of pay banding, you would do it sooner rather than later.[/QUOTE]" Posted by Alpha.

Alpha

I would argue that the opposite is true. The longer (hopefully forever) we hold off on conceding to pay banding, the more leverage we have.

Each and every day for the next decade the training demand gets larger and larger. Massive retirements, new aircraft, growth, etc.

Upgrades our pilots have been waiting over a decade to materialize. Taking another step backward is too much to ask.

Agreeing to pay banding now would reduce the number of pilots needed in every category, reduce the number of seniority list instructors and create stagnation.

You see value, I see the loss of jobs and stagnation.

Hopefully, as many have said, our union will not even consider pay banding.

Jerry

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomgoodman (Post 1675561)

It covers some of the costs that Medicare doesn't cover:
What's Medicare supplement (Medigap) insurance? | Medicare.gov
Other such plans are offered by DALRC, AARP, Humana, etc.
Only the DPMP and DALRC plans get a partial subsidy from Delta, but otherwise they are all in the same ballpark IMHO.
It's true that the average person will pay more in premiums than they will collect in benefits (like all insurance works), and here's an article which says you probably don't need it:
Medicare Supplemental Policies: Do You Need One? | David Belk

Thanks Tom. I didn't even know DAL had any sort of retirement supplement.

Most fun I ever had at the airline [other than the 440] was four day trips "never leave Texas" on the 737-200. The three 20 year old dancing girls in the back helped........ But that's all gone now, sniff...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Purple Drank (Post 1675443)

Sounds like something management would say.

You know, it would be nice if even one time there could be a discussion about issues based on logic and reason and not emotion and attack. Seriously, do United and American have pay banding? Does Southwest have a single pay rate? What other domestic/international competitors do we have on the scale of Delta? So who is different? I will let you answer the questions and see if you can even tell the truth about known facts or if you will just attack.

A little advice, when you try to argue on emotion and attack you will lose every time. This is a business negotiation about money, nothing more, nothing less. If you treat it like some high school popularity contest you will be crushed. I expect the next words to come out of your mouth to be "he can't sit at our table, this is the cool kids table". That is your level of discourse.

Our contract is riddled with tradeoffs of pay and productivity. Why isn't our vacation day worth 3:30 or 5:45 or 15:00 hours? That is a trade. Why is the ALV 72 -84 and not 15-20? That is a trade. Why don't we have unlimited sick leave? That is a trade. Why do we have any training freezes at all? That is a trade. I could go on and on.

Anyone that ever white slips, green slips, swaps trips for more pay, or doesn't try to personal drop every one of their assigned trips is simply selling jobs for money. To try to equate this issue with a moral crusade is just emotional claptrap that is designed to deflect from the facts on the ground.

Management wannabe? Shadow MEC? Seriously, just win the debate in the arena of facts and logic. At least if you are not scared of that. One advantage of facing very trying circumstances is you get a little clarity on what is important and what is not. Kick me out of the cool kids table and shun me and call me internet names. See if I care one little bit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by orvil (Post 1675610)

Thanks Tom. I didn't even know DAL had any sort of retirement supplement.

Goes to show ya, nobody ever reads this stuff.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gzsg (Post 1675500)

Right now retirements are running about 2 for each age 65 retirement. So you can reasonably double the retirements each year. The training problem going forward is becoming more clear to management each and every day.

That is not an accurate statement. You are assuming retirements will remain linear based on the previous number. (Very small data set to found your assumption of the next ten years of retirement numbers.)

Someone on this forum, a long time ago, (it may have been Sailingfun or PinnapleGuy) stated that retirements normally follow the trend of mandatory age 65 retirements, plus 1% of the seniority list. That number, I believe, has been fairly accurate since the merger. (Not counting early-out numbers.)

Example: 2014 has 63 mandatory (age 65) retirements. 1% of the list is approx. 115 pilots. Total retirements for all of 2014 should be close to 180 pilots. Next year, 170 mandatory retirements, plus 120 pilots (1% of list) equals ~290 pilots.

Your 2:1 ratio is WAY off, sorry.

GJ

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1675571)

I knew I would regret this because that was but a specific example that would have worked at a specific point in time if.. and it was a big if... our group was homogenous. (we had other mergers before NWA too...)

I still maintain that for every guy that has a woody for bigger airplanes that go around the world, there is a similar number of guys that don't. Flying turnarounds on small jets is very senior in Europe with similar pay schemes. For some of those that have been waiting to fly the 330 or 7Er, it is ONLY because of the pay. (When I was a new FO on the 7ER, I flew to SVO for almost 2 months before ever getting out of the hotel. Many of the people that I flew with ONLY did it for the $$) We can debate that until the pigs return to Capistrano.

True statement. I'm on the 737 and can hold the 7ER. Anyone senior to me on the 737 can hold it, too. It's a choice. I've done the around the world thing. I like staying in the same time zone. So does everyone senior to me.

Reserve bucket question here for the 7ER. If there is a 4 day trip in open time does a senior guy with 4 days of availability get it or does a junior guy with 8 days of availability get it? Same question for a 6 day trip. Does the senior guy with 6 days of availability get it or does the junior guy with 10 days of availability get it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gzsg (Post 1675606)

"For sure, if you want to get the most value out of pay banding, you would do it sooner rather than later." Posted by Alpha.

Alpha

I would argue that the opposite is true. The longer (hopefully forever) we hold off on conceding to pay banding, the more leverage we have.

Each and every day for the next decade the training demand gets larger and larger. Massive retirements, new aircraft, growth, etc.

Upgrades our pilots have been waiting over a decade to materialize. Taking another step backward is too much to ask.

Agreeing to pay banding now would reduce the number of pilots needed in every category, reduce the number of seniority list instructors and create stagnation.

You see value, I see the loss of jobs and stagnation.

Hopefully, as many have said, our union will not even consider pay banding.

Jerry

The only thing that will cause stagnation going forward is the lack of new big airplanes. We have very few on order. Stagnation sill not be driven by training, or pay scheme or any of that.. again, another agenda driven straw man argument. When I did my analysis, the 757/767 was 35% of the fleet. When the 757s go away, it will be a smaller airframe. Pays less. Tastes good. Right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1675625)

So I guess now on one is going to ever retire?