index

Actually Professor, and I don't mean that in the condescending sarcasm that Alan used it, I think you have it exactly right. A very astute observation.

How did you like the opening battery of questions regarding compensation increase (1) prior to the amendable date, (2) 1 year after the amendable date, and (3) 2 years after the amendable date? An obvious "reminder" from the NC that they still have the TVM mindset. Hurry up and get an early agreement at all cost.

Figures lie and liars figure.

Alan Shore

While I have not read the actual emails from these councils, I understand them to be concerning issues such as pay banding, CDOs, out-of-base swaps, etc. and calling them concessionary.

Can anyone here post either of the emails?

DAL 88 Driver

The C2015 Contract Survey is now available. Your participation in this survey is extremely important, and will help us develop our contract opener in April 2015. We believe that Atlanta-based pilots should give serious consideration to several questions in the survey which could have outcomes that may not be readily apparent to our base, be viewed as concessionary in some circumstances, or may adversely affect your quality of life. Please take the time to complete the survey and read each question carefully. We need your input.

Each base is different, and other bases are also communicating their specific concerns. A number of questions in this survey came from council resolutions passed at other bases, or from pilots who participated in the webinars in August. We wanted to address some of the questions we feel might impact Atlanta pilots, or differ from the input we have received specifically from you, the Council 44 pilots. We represent you and want to make sure we gather your input correctly and communicate your concerns. Please read over the explanations below and include this information as you decide on your survey responses. If you have any questions about the survey or need more information about a particular section please don’t hesitate to contact us.

Pay Banding (Question 28):
The explanation preceding this question notes that fewer training events would have a corresponding reduction in required pilot staffing. Less staffing may mean fewer positions available, and fewer pilots required overall. This might be considered concessionary. Additionally, pay banding could have an effect on your seniority in category or “in the band” (quality of life) as pilots “in the band” may be less inclined to bid off aircraft and train on new equipment. Also assumptions on where your current aircraft resides in the band may be just that, assumptions.

Premium Pay above a certain threshold (Question 39):
This is commonly referred to as time-and-a-half above a certain threshold. This is a “leveler” for premium pay flying for the pilot group as a whole. It should be noted that this type of system could have implications that significantly change the way we add and adjust our schedules. Currently, with no other changes, the additional flying would not positively affect the staffing formula as a GS or Reserve Callout does. Adding a premium pay treatment to flying above a certain threshold without a staffing formula change or without applying some sort of pickup limit to swap with the pot and the Swap Board, could result in less staffing, fewer GS opportunities and reduce reserve staffing requirements. Or, Delta might adjust staffing to a level that there is little or no chance for flying above the trigger, thereby reducing the amount of flying available to each pilot.

Out-of-base Swaps (Question 52):
All Atlanta-based pilots should carefully consider the impact of allowing pilots who might otherwise be unable to hold their category in ATL, to fly ATL category pairings while holding the category in another pilot base as a regular line holder.

Out-of-base swaps would allow that pilot to pick up time here in ATL off the swap board, reducing available time for pilots in the ATL categories. As noted, out-of-base swaps done through the pilot-to-pilot swap board would not be transparent to other pilots and would not be subject to pick-up limits, PCS run rules, and other factors. It could result in a run on ATL open time due to pilots picking up trips in ATL and transferring that flying to pilots based elsewhere; potentially reducing premium pay flying for the Atlanta pilots. Additionally, you should carefully consider that the effect of transferring Atlanta flying from one base to another through out-of-base swaps could in turn negatively affect staffing in the base out of which the flying came.

Staffing Formula (Question 68):
A change to allow Crew Resources to adjust the ALV by base provides a great deal of flexibility to them in staffing. This would be a concession by the pilot group in our PWA.

PBS Values (Question 69):
Allowing pilots to not include the value for certain activities (CQ or vacation, for examples) in the PBS line build would allow some pilots to have even more hours put into their initial line, reducing time available to pilots lower on the category seniority list to build a line and resulting in fewer regular lines. It allows pilots to “work more.” This would likely result in a staffing formula adjustment in later years. This might be considered a PWA concession by the pilot group.

Sick Bank (Question 88-90):
Survey notes explain that most carriers with a sick leave bank have accrual rates at a far lower rate than at Delta. As noted in the contract comparison, sick leave accrual rates at these carriers are in the 60-70 hours per year range as compared to Delta pilots 270 hour annually. Delta pilots currently have an average use commensurate with those carriers’ annual accrual rates. While not necessarily concessionary, the distinction must be made between the two different types of systems and the impact that it could have on your available sick leave in a given year. We do have a “use-it-or-lose-it” system, and while other airlines bank sick time, their accrual rates pale in comparison to ours.

Thank you for taking the time to complete the survey and provide us your input.

Hermon, Dave, Armando and David

Sink r8

I read C44's e-mail on fb, and the take-away is that the survey includes items that originated in other councils, and were requested by them, which the reps don't seem to endorse at all, i.e. OOBS and CDO's.

If you read between the lines, a bunch of guys sat down, and some guys fought to put in things their councils wanted, and eventually everyone got to make a pitch to the group for their pet concession. I'm totally guessing here, but I imagine we're looking at the product of a dysfunctional process.

The important take-away from C44 is that the survey leaves it wide open for special interests to find a different path. It sort of turns the tables on us, after the CDO fiasco, by NOT filtering out items you would never expect your rep to allow in the survey, and having us be responsible for reading the fine print. It's quite democratic, in a way, but it leaves our contract very open to ill-considered concessions. It would work a lot better if we were asked straight questions about whether we want certain items.

Basically we're being given the keys to the car. The car might explode if we do something wrong, and the instruction manual isn't very clear on what might make that happen, but here we are. This is clearly the best shot special-interest groups and concession-lovers will have to gut the contract in a very long time.

My suggestion would be to do your homework, and read very, very carefully. I would save the survey, and review it a couple of times before submitting.

80ktsClamp

Looks like a nice balanced letter to me. I really appreciate the "this could be a concession" aspect if we show in the survey we want these items.

Pitch fork and torch stowed... for now.

80ktsClamp

That's good advice, Sink.

LeineLodge

Agreed. We have a month. I'm going to sleep on mine for a little while.

scambo1

I guess we can't use which the websters dictionary recognizes as real words. Maybe we should all just use words out of the urban dictionary. Yo?

iaflyer

I had not read these email prior to DAL 88 posting them above.

My council (20) hasn't put anything out like this yet. I appreciate the comments in the email by whoever wrote them. The comments on the Survey questions are like "con papers" to the survey. It just gives a different look at some of the answers that perhaps people hadn't though of.

Often there are side effects to a change in the contract that some or all didn't anticipate. Nice that someone is pointing out possibilities before we jump into the survey.

iaflyer

Thank you.