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)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elliot (Post 1863358)

Same thing will happen if/when they make the 330/350 the same category.

It does not look like the company intends to do that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elvis90 (Post 1863413)

I made up my mind 6 months before you began posting on here. I am a NO vote with respect to pay banding, as well as any cuts to profit sharing. I made that position clear on my contract survey as well. If this is something the company wants you can guarantee that there is a data-driven reason for it. I've flown with the negotiating chair and he mentioned that pay banding may be on the table because the company has a training problem that will just get worse with more new hires and more aircraft acquisitions.

Congrats on the 7ER bid.

<break/break>

I think people are conflating concessions and compromise. (Denny said it best a couple days ago.) The act of negotiation requires compromise. Without this 'give and take' of negotiation, what motivation does either side have to stay at the 'table'? Concessions are a loss of something with nothing in return. Compromise may be the 'give' of a small (inconsequential) item, with a greater sum in return.

With that being said, lets debate the semantics for AT LEAST another ten pages of APCF. :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elliot (Post 1863358)

Same thing will happen if/when they make the 330/350 the same category.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 1863471)

It does not look like the company intends to do that.

I asked Andy Hummel the question at the recent Ops road show.

While the A330/350 are the same type rating, the question will be if the FAA requires maintaining recency in both types. If so, then you're correct, the company will not make them the same category.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wilbur Wright (Post 1863490)

While the A330/350 are the same type rating, the question will be if the FAA requires maintaining recency in both types. If so, then you're correct, the company will not make them the same category.

A330

http://i1202.photobucket.com/albums/...psqcvqoboo.jpg

A350

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget....6/dsc00235.jpg

Quote:

Originally Posted by profit (Post 1863371)

How Can I Avoid the AMT?-Kiplinger

Great article. Thanks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenderRodriguez (Post 1863360)

When you were "experiencing" this before, was your company retiring half the seniority list in the amount of time that we will be? I'm just curious. Mandatory retirements are the one thing we can count on. Pilots WILL leave at age 65, and they WILL be leaving in droves. And they tend to be at the top of the list too btw.

You guys that are beating this drum need to empirically prove that it is the crisis you are alleging. Short of that it is just more emotional drivel.

And fwiw, I haven't made up my mind yet on this issue. I want proof though one way or the other.

Simple math can show the loss of potential income.

Beating the drum of planned retirements is dumb, sorry. Age 65 probably won't stay. I'd like to see it go back to age 60, but thatS an entirely different conversation.

With no reason for people to bid, or progress their career, stagnation occurs. Simple. Loss of QOL. If you want pay banding, go work for an airline with one fleet type. A benefit of DAL is options. Lots. For QOL of a base, of different categories. Throw pay banding in... Those options shrink as there is less motivation for others to bid around the system.

It greatly reduces staffing. Do I need to explain that?

If, and if this was 9/15/2001 or during BK.... And it solved some huge problem to keep us afloat, talk to me then. I'm all for saving the company bacon... But this is not the right time nor place for pay banding.

I've told my reps... So be it. 15yrs of BS ALPA. I'm hoping for a better experience at DALPA. If not, I'll sign a card... I haven't yet, because I want to see this section 6 first.

What kind of restriction Is the company looking for with banding? Because that will be the most important factor. Can you change in your band, only go up in bands etc.that determines how bad it is. Can anyone shed light on what the co wants in terms of band restrictions. Also what would the bands be.
Thanks

Quote:

Originally Posted by ilinipilot (Post 1863583)

Since section 3 is the last part of the contract discussed, this is all just mental whackin off. When someone throws a grenade in a room, we all debate the heck out of it and watch it blow up.

That said, pay banding as we are discussing it just equals the pay rate across similarly size aircraft. In this way training is reduced since there is no reason to chase pay rate within the band.

No one can shed light on what the company want except the guys that have signed NDAs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big E 757 (Post 1863452)

By state of the business, he means that with all of the retirements coming up we shouldn't worry about things that slow progression or reduce head count.

I disagree, we have stagnated for so long, now that things are finally moving in the right direction, I don't want anything to slow movement down one bit. I'm also concerned about age 67 rearing it's ugly head when retirements really kick in a few years from now. But that's just me.

It's actually age 68 In Japan. you can still pilot an airliner when you're 67 but must retire at 68, so it was a 3 year extension.

So age 68 in the way we say things.

Quote:

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1863601)

It's actually age 68 In Japan, you can still pilot an airliner when you're 67 but must retire at 68.

So age 65 + 3 years not 2.

I think the company should hand out samurai swords when guys reach sixty. You know, as an act of goodwill.:D