Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
01-29-2015, 12:51 PM
Runs with scissors
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,724
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
Me and Whiz go back. He's good people.
I know he works hard for the pilots although I'm at a fog at some of the higher level stuff you guys talk about. I'm rather simple and have my little jumbo RJ scope fiefdom and am cool hanging out right there.
The one thing about the internet is you're allowed to go further than you normally would in how you talk to people. I've been insulted and unfortunately been insulting (unless were talking about Alaskan, than that was so deserved.... jk). My strategy is when someone is letting you have it, take the high road for as long as you can not because you'll make them look bad or something like that, but rather because you won't regret what you wrote if you do.
I think I'd like all of you if we were flying a trip. But no offense. I think I would like Timbo the most. Until the violations piled up and I ended up wishing I had purchased loss of license insurance. Damn you Timbo.
Whiz = Shiz. Or so my all knowing autocorrect says.
I know he works hard for the pilots although I'm at a fog at some of the higher level stuff you guys talk about. I'm rather simple and have my little jumbo RJ scope fiefdom and am cool hanging out right there.
The one thing about the internet is you're allowed to go further than you normally would in how you talk to people. I've been insulted and unfortunately been insulting (unless were talking about Alaskan, than that was so deserved.... jk). My strategy is when someone is letting you have it, take the high road for as long as you can not because you'll make them look bad or something like that, but rather because you won't regret what you wrote if you do.
I think I'd like all of you if we were flying a trip. But no offense. I think I would like Timbo the most. Until the violations piled up and I ended up wishing I had purchased loss of license insurance. Damn you Timbo.
Whiz = Shiz. Or so my all knowing autocorrect says.
01-29-2015, 12:54 PM
Super Moderator
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 6,868
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
I think it's good we talk about PS because there is one thing to hash out, is which one you think is better:
Option A: $150K flight pay + $30K PS = $180K.
Option B: $180K flight pay.
Some guys will look at A and say well that over the life of C2015 chances are that PS is guaranteed and its a %, so the more I fly the more I make so leave PS untouched. We will be profitable for some time, probably profitable even in the next downturn.
Some guys will say that $30K PS is at risk, it isn't guaranteed and it could go away. Give me $180K in hard pay.
Now the bigger question is would someone who prefers Option B be okay with say I'm actually fine with $170K hard pay over Option A, because at least it's guaranteed.
To me when I hear "at-risk pay" being bandied about it sounds more like reducing W2 for the sake of having more guaranteed pay.
Personally I'm for Option A, I'll hedge my bet the next few years with RA in charge we're profitable. But it's a bet I think some guys are probably not willing to make.
Thoughts *****es?
Option A: $150K flight pay + $30K PS = $180K.
Option B: $180K flight pay.
Some guys will look at A and say well that over the life of C2015 chances are that PS is guaranteed and its a %, so the more I fly the more I make so leave PS untouched. We will be profitable for some time, probably profitable even in the next downturn.
Some guys will say that $30K PS is at risk, it isn't guaranteed and it could go away. Give me $180K in hard pay.
Now the bigger question is would someone who prefers Option B be okay with say I'm actually fine with $170K hard pay over Option A, because at least it's guaranteed.
To me when I hear "at-risk pay" being bandied about it sounds more like reducing W2 for the sake of having more guaranteed pay.
Personally I'm for Option A, I'll hedge my bet the next few years with RA in charge we're profitable. But it's a bet I think some guys are probably not willing to make.
Thoughts *****es?
A very sage analysis. I concur.
Scoop
01-29-2015, 01:10 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Originally Posted by Sink r8
You got me there. Let's say I hope it's not meaningful that some of us are tripping over themselves to speculate on the company's position, when we haven't even formulated our own. APC right now, is like your wife going to the dealership with you, and frantically whispering about all the things the dealer will ask for, before they even have a chance to say anything. You're not exactly sure how close they're listening, but it just doesn't seem like the best move.
Had you and wife discussed this before hand, probably done some internet research and came prepared you'd look at the guy together and say no.
If you didn't talk beforehand then she looks at you and says, well it is, isn't it? Sir I need a moment. I told you... Well... Sorry... I know I know... Timbo said? You've been talking to Timbo again? I told you not to talk to him anymore. When did you talk to him? Online? On Skype? Wait...
01-29-2015, 01:11 PM
Runs with scissors
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,724
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
I think it's good we talk about PS because there is one thing to hash out, is which one you think is better:
Option A: $150K flight pay + $30K PS = $180K.
Option B: $180K flight pay.
Option C: $150K flight pay + 18% to restore to 2004 = $177K + 'at risk' PS = $30K = $207K
Some guys will look at A and say that over the life of C2015 the chances are very good that PS is nearly guaranteed money and since its a % of your flight pay the more I fly the more I make- so leave PS alone. We will be profitable for some time, probably profitable even in the next downturn.
Some guys will say that $30K PS is at risk, it isn't guaranteed and it could go away. Give me $180K in hard pay.
Now the bigger question is would someone who prefers Option B be okay with say... $170K hard pay over Option A? Because again it's guaranteed.
Or would they prefer Option C, because PS is always At Risk, it cannot be counted as pay. It should be viewed as a Bonus, when the company is doing well.
To me when I hear "at-risk pay" being bandied about it sounds more like reducing W2 for the sake of having more guaranteed pay. So I cringe.
Personally I'm for Option A because I'll hedge my bet that over the next few years (with RA in charge) we're probably profitable. But it's a bet. I think some guys are probably not willing to make that bet.
Thoughts *****es?
Option A: $150K flight pay + $30K PS = $180K.
Option B: $180K flight pay.
Option C: $150K flight pay + 18% to restore to 2004 = $177K + 'at risk' PS = $30K = $207K
Some guys will look at A and say that over the life of C2015 the chances are very good that PS is nearly guaranteed money and since its a % of your flight pay the more I fly the more I make- so leave PS alone. We will be profitable for some time, probably profitable even in the next downturn.
Some guys will say that $30K PS is at risk, it isn't guaranteed and it could go away. Give me $180K in hard pay.
Now the bigger question is would someone who prefers Option B be okay with say... $170K hard pay over Option A? Because again it's guaranteed.
Or would they prefer Option C, because PS is always At Risk, it cannot be counted as pay. It should be viewed as a Bonus, when the company is doing well.
To me when I hear "at-risk pay" being bandied about it sounds more like reducing W2 for the sake of having more guaranteed pay. So I cringe.
Personally I'm for Option A because I'll hedge my bet that over the next few years (with RA in charge) we're probably profitable. But it's a bet. I think some guys are probably not willing to make that bet.
Thoughts *****es?
01-29-2015, 01:15 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,273
Originally Posted by Purple Drank
In C12, it was widely reported that the company opened with 0% raises. The company came to ALPA to get an early deal, but offered 0%! Yet ALPA didn't walk out.
If the company brings any sort of insulting nonsense like that this time, after publicly yearning for an early deal, I hope ALPA has the stores (and common sense) to walk away for a good while.
If the company brings any sort of insulting nonsense like that this time, after publicly yearning for an early deal, I hope ALPA has the stores (and common sense) to walk away for a good while.
I suspect that might make the company happy. The NMB won't even give us the time of day if we walk out.
01-29-2015, 01:15 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Originally Posted by Timbo
Don't tease me like that!
I debated between using that picture and this line:
"I've never been with a real man before, just Timbo."
$@!@$!$. Van time.
01-29-2015, 01:39 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Originally Posted by Timbo
Fixed your post, added option C.
The other thing I want to say about PS is I was reviewing the 2012 Q2 transcript and it reminded that as we reduce PS we also reduce non-union PS. And of course PS was what EB added as a way DAL was going to pay for its new pilot contract in there 2012 Q3 transcript: "And, Mary Jane, this is Ed. One additional thing, we also reduced the profit sharing going forward and that’s an important part of helping to fund that cost growth."
So there is a huge incentive to cut PS.
On the other hand, you have the IAM and FAs. You have them touting the PS, and rightfully so, in the lead up to Feb 14 and you have a lot of "we are happy to set aside" "proud" "team" etc.
IDK what they want at DAL. I'm sure they'd love to beat back IAM and then have us cut our own PS in C2015 but who knows.
I know it wouldn't be bad if we talked about what we want. And given the schizophrenic way we fill out surveys, see the results from the trip construction survey, I'm sure we are all over the freaking map.
Here's a question, how much of a profit should be held for shareholders, debt repayment and reinvestment? 80%, 60%, 90%, 50%?
Last edited by forgot to bid; 01-29-2015 at 02:20 PM.
01-29-2015, 02:24 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2007
Position: Fairly local
Posts: 1,458
DAL FO lands solo?
I just heard a clip on the radio news that on a Delta MD-90 enroute to 'Vegas, after the CA left the cockpit to use the lav couldn't get back in because the door malfunctioned. They said the FO landed solo. 
Can't find anything on the interwebs. Anybody hear anything?
Can't find anything on the interwebs. Anybody hear anything?
01-29-2015, 02:32 PM
New Hire
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 7
Originally Posted by Hrkdrivr
I just heard a clip on the radio news that on a Delta MD-90 enroute to 'Vegas, after the CA left the cockpit to use the lav he couldn't get back in because the door malfunctioned. They said the FO landed solo.
Can't find anything on the interwebs. Anybody hear anything?
Can't find anything on the interwebs. Anybody hear anything?
Flight from Mpls. lands in Vegas with pilot locked out of cockpit
01-29-2015, 02:50 PM
Runs with scissors
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,724
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
I debated between using that picture and this line:
"I've never been with a real man before, just Timbo."
$@!@$!$. Van time.
Ever been in a Turkish prison?
Ever seen a grown man naked, on the flight deck?
Oh wait, you fly for Delta, not SW!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
