Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
01-29-2015 | 01:11 PM
Runs with scissors
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 7,847
Likes: 0
From: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
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: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,876
Likes: 193
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: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
01-29-2015 | 01:39 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
Well. There's that.
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%?
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
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,503
Likes: 2
From: Fairly local
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: Oct 2010
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
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: Dec 2009
Posts: 7,847
Likes: 0
From: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Ever been in a Turkish prison?
Ever seen a grown man naked, on the flight deck?
Oh wait, you fly for Delta, not SW!
01-29-2015 | 03:13 PM
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
Carl,
Not necessarily. If money is saved from another part of the operation and applied to pilot pay, the net number may be "cost neutral" but to we pilots, it is a gain. In the case of C2012 management reported savings from up gauging the operation and saving on maintenance expense.
ALPA, generally, tries to stay away from forward-looking projections and stick to real, after the fact, measured results. You can tell us how your pay has worked out since C2012. My Delta W2 delta between years has been (without changing equipment or bidding status):
2011 - Baseline
2012 - 4%
2013 - 27.5%
2014 - 80%
Frankly; when I just ran these numbers they surprised me (income from other jobs outside of Delta has declined, offsetting gains). My best guess is the other factors involved are longevity bumps and the ability to pick up a green slip every other month or so. Because of my other hobbies, I never get more than a one or two-day greenie. All in I fly+credit between 75 and 95 a month.
Contract 2012's scope was a very definite improvement for the pilots which could be reported to investors as "cost neutral" or perhaps even accretive to the Company's bottom line. Using unit cost analysis, flying a passenger on a 717 may be more efficient to Delta than an old CRJ with a topped out crew, but for the new 717 Captain at Delta going to nearly $200 an hour is usually a big raise.
Not sure who you mean by "you guys." You and I are both Delta pilots. I voted against C2012, but with the clarity of 20/20 hindsight it worked well. C2012 was certainly preferable to stagnation.
Continued up gauging will benefit both the pilots and Delta. I get the feeling (subjectively) that the push for C2015 is going to be improvements that you feel more on your end of the seniority list (which will benefit all of us).
Not necessarily. If money is saved from another part of the operation and applied to pilot pay, the net number may be "cost neutral" but to we pilots, it is a gain. In the case of C2012 management reported savings from up gauging the operation and saving on maintenance expense.
ALPA, generally, tries to stay away from forward-looking projections and stick to real, after the fact, measured results. You can tell us how your pay has worked out since C2012. My Delta W2 delta between years has been (without changing equipment or bidding status):
2011 - Baseline
2012 - 4%
2013 - 27.5%
2014 - 80%
Frankly; when I just ran these numbers they surprised me (income from other jobs outside of Delta has declined, offsetting gains). My best guess is the other factors involved are longevity bumps and the ability to pick up a green slip every other month or so. Because of my other hobbies, I never get more than a one or two-day greenie. All in I fly+credit between 75 and 95 a month.
Contract 2012's scope was a very definite improvement for the pilots which could be reported to investors as "cost neutral" or perhaps even accretive to the Company's bottom line. Using unit cost analysis, flying a passenger on a 717 may be more efficient to Delta than an old CRJ with a topped out crew, but for the new 717 Captain at Delta going to nearly $200 an hour is usually a big raise.
Not sure who you mean by "you guys." You and I are both Delta pilots. I voted against C2012, but with the clarity of 20/20 hindsight it worked well. C2012 was certainly preferable to stagnation.
Continued up gauging will benefit both the pilots and Delta. I get the feeling (subjectively) that the push for C2015 is going to be improvements that you feel more on your end of the seniority list (which will benefit all of us).
What I don't understand is guys like you that are spring loaded to the default position of defending management first and trying to explain away things for them.
Carl
01-29-2015 | 03:25 PM
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
Carl
01-29-2015 | 03:26 PM
ATL A320 B
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
From: No longer MEM or 9, but still a guy.
Just read the Wykoff-ALPA FAA interpretations of Part 117 issued January 20th and it seems that we need to adjust a few things at DAL to be in compliance. It seems to ban our current practice of "pre assuming" acceptance of an FDP extension, and we need to extend the FDP of a reserves last flying day of a rotation by 15 minutes to account for the required schedule check.
Or are we just going to keep pretending that these interpretations and clarifications don't apply to Delta somehow...
Or are we just going to keep pretending that these interpretations and clarifications don't apply to Delta somehow...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
