Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-02-2015 | 04:08 PM
Straight QOL, homie
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,202
Likes: 1
From: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
05-02-2015 | 05:26 PM
Doesn't Get Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,599
Likes: 2
OK, I think our QOL should include
1. holiday pay for duty on holidays,
2. an additional APD's, like one per quarter,
3. the ability to take sick leave to help a family member who is sick or injured, and
4. an annual set of positive space r/t passes for immediate family members.
I have no idea if ALPA asked for any of that, but I'd like to see it in the contract as well. So your right, if QOL items are up for discussion, there are some of the ones that we should demand.
1. holiday pay for duty on holidays,
2. an additional APD's, like one per quarter,
3. the ability to take sick leave to help a family member who is sick or injured, and
4. an annual set of positive space r/t passes for immediate family members.
I have no idea if ALPA asked for any of that, but I'd like to see it in the contract as well. So your right, if QOL items are up for discussion, there are some of the ones that we should demand.
6. International override for all international cities.
7. GS pay for any rotation that has a layover in GDL at the Hampton Inn.
8. Flight pay for the van ride to San Ramon
9. Annual Hat cleaning allowance
05-02-2015 | 06:05 PM
Runs with scissors
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 7,847
Likes: 0
From: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
I agree with this. Am I for recovery obligations? Hell no. But I could care less about protecting a good deal for a small number of pilots that should move on anyways. I know, I know. Choices, and that opens up capt seats to jr guys, you can do this too when you are a senior FO, etc. maybe this will creat faster upward movement for the "other" 90% of F/Os. Whether you like it or not, there are quite a few jr FOs that I know of that agree with this.
Think about what the company is looking at in the next 10 years, manning wise. Huge retirements. Huge training. Huge hiring.
Take a look at the A/E that is posted today. Imagine if all of those positions did NOT require double manning for IOE flights. How many bodies does that save the company from hiring?
If the company is allowed to pull trips out of the bid package, and hold them back for 'IOE', that's a lot LESS manning they need in every category. Captains as well as F/O's.
New Captains need IOE too you know. What if the company pulls all of those 'training trips' from the bid package and never awards them?
Yeah... they don't need XX% pilots to cover that flying.... which will then be covered by IOE's.
This is less about guys sitting home and getting paid, then it is about how many guys the company needs to staff every category.
You guys are only looking at the short term; who gets to stay home and get paid. The Company is looking at how many guys they will need to staff every category going forward. THEY KNOW who is retiring, and when, THEY KNOW how many pilots they will need to hire to replace them, and how many guys are going to sit home for IOE's.
MANNING is what this is about.
HIRING is what this is about.
ADVANCEMENT is what this is about.
05-02-2015 | 06:24 PM
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
This will NOT create faster upward movement for anyone. This is about MANNING.
Think about what the company is looking at in the next 10 years, manning wise. Huge retirements. Huge training. Huge hiring.
Take a look at the A/E that is posted today. Imagine if all of those positions did NOT require double manning for IOE flights. How many bodies does that save the company from hiring?
If the company is allowed to pull trips out of the bid package, and hold them back for 'IOE', that's a lot LESS manning they need in every category. Captains as well as F/O's.
New Captains need IOE too you know. What if the company pulls all of those 'training trips' from the bid package and never awards them?
Yeah... they don't need XX% pilots to cover that flying.... which will then be covered by IOE's.
This is less about guys sitting home and getting paid, then it is about how many guys the company needs to staff every category.
You guys are only looking at the short term; who gets to stay home and get paid. The Company is looking at how many guys they will need to staff every category going forward. THEY KNOW who is retiring, and when, THEY KNOW how many pilots they will need to hire to replace them, and how many guys are going to sit home for IOE's.
MANNING is what this is about.
HIRING is what this is about.
ADVANCEMENT is what this is about.
Think about what the company is looking at in the next 10 years, manning wise. Huge retirements. Huge training. Huge hiring.
Take a look at the A/E that is posted today. Imagine if all of those positions did NOT require double manning for IOE flights. How many bodies does that save the company from hiring?
If the company is allowed to pull trips out of the bid package, and hold them back for 'IOE', that's a lot LESS manning they need in every category. Captains as well as F/O's.
New Captains need IOE too you know. What if the company pulls all of those 'training trips' from the bid package and never awards them?
Yeah... they don't need XX% pilots to cover that flying.... which will then be covered by IOE's.
This is less about guys sitting home and getting paid, then it is about how many guys the company needs to staff every category.
You guys are only looking at the short term; who gets to stay home and get paid. The Company is looking at how many guys they will need to staff every category going forward. THEY KNOW who is retiring, and when, THEY KNOW how many pilots they will need to hire to replace them, and how many guys are going to sit home for IOE's.
MANNING is what this is about.
HIRING is what this is about.
ADVANCEMENT is what this is about.
Carl
05-02-2015 | 06:32 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
From: 5-9 block, kill removing
This will NOT create faster upward movement for anyone. This is about MANNING.
Think about what the company is looking at in the next 10 years, manning wise. Huge retirements. Huge training. Huge hiring.
Take a look at the A/E that is posted today. Imagine if all of those positions did NOT require double manning for IOE flights. How many bodies does that save the company from hiring?
If the company is allowed to pull trips out of the bid package, and hold them back for 'IOE', that's a lot LESS manning they need in every category. Captains as well as F/O's.
New Captains need IOE too you know. What if the company pulls all of those 'training trips' from the bid package and never awards them?
Yeah... they don't need XX% pilots to cover that flying.... which will then be covered by IOE's.
This is less about guys sitting home and getting paid, then it is about how many guys the company needs to staff every category.
You guys are only looking at the short term; who gets to stay home and get paid. The Company is looking at how many guys they will need to staff every category going forward. THEY KNOW who is retiring, and when, THEY KNOW how many pilots they will need to hire to replace them, and how many guys are going to sit home for IOE's.
MANNING is what this is about.
HIRING is what this is about.
ADVANCEMENT is what this is about.
Think about what the company is looking at in the next 10 years, manning wise. Huge retirements. Huge training. Huge hiring.
Take a look at the A/E that is posted today. Imagine if all of those positions did NOT require double manning for IOE flights. How many bodies does that save the company from hiring?
If the company is allowed to pull trips out of the bid package, and hold them back for 'IOE', that's a lot LESS manning they need in every category. Captains as well as F/O's.
New Captains need IOE too you know. What if the company pulls all of those 'training trips' from the bid package and never awards them?
Yeah... they don't need XX% pilots to cover that flying.... which will then be covered by IOE's.
This is less about guys sitting home and getting paid, then it is about how many guys the company needs to staff every category.
You guys are only looking at the short term; who gets to stay home and get paid. The Company is looking at how many guys they will need to staff every category going forward. THEY KNOW who is retiring, and when, THEY KNOW how many pilots they will need to hire to replace them, and how many guys are going to sit home for IOE's.
MANNING is what this is about.
HIRING is what this is about.
ADVANCEMENT is what this is about.
Pretty enlightening right there Timbo.
05-02-2015 | 06:33 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
Timbo wins.
05-02-2015 | 06:46 PM
Runs with scissors
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 7,847
Likes: 0
From: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Thanks guys, but it's not Rocket Surgery.
It the Company wants it, 99.9% of the time, it's BAD for the pilots.
With an upcoming "Pilot Shortage", everything they want, is aimed at reducing the number of retiring pilots they will need to replace. It's not about money, they have plenty of money, what they are worried about is having enough pilots. If every pilot is flying 92 hours hard time, vs. sitting home for IOE, or flying 75, well, that's 21% less pilots they need to hire.
21% less 777 Captains, 21% less A350 Captains, 21% less A330 Captains, 21% less replacements for the retiring 747 Captains, etc. All the way down the list.
Now, what if they didn't have to staff for IOE? What if every pilot had to FLY 92, rather than sit home for an IOE?
With our 12,000(+) pilots today, that's 2,500 less pilots they need to fly the same block hours.
It the Company wants it, 99.9% of the time, it's BAD for the pilots.
With an upcoming "Pilot Shortage", everything they want, is aimed at reducing the number of retiring pilots they will need to replace. It's not about money, they have plenty of money, what they are worried about is having enough pilots. If every pilot is flying 92 hours hard time, vs. sitting home for IOE, or flying 75, well, that's 21% less pilots they need to hire.
21% less 777 Captains, 21% less A350 Captains, 21% less A330 Captains, 21% less replacements for the retiring 747 Captains, etc. All the way down the list.
Now, what if they didn't have to staff for IOE? What if every pilot had to FLY 92, rather than sit home for an IOE?
With our 12,000(+) pilots today, that's 2,500 less pilots they need to fly the same block hours.
Last edited by Timbo; 05-02-2015 at 07:04 PM.
05-02-2015 | 06:48 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,971
Likes: 0
From: Kickin’ Back
05-02-2015 | 07:03 PM
Runs with scissors
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 7,847
Likes: 0
From: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
05-02-2015 | 07:14 PM
Doesn't Get Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,599
Likes: 2
Monetize profit sharing....they don't want shareholders to see pilots getting 100K in profit sharing. They would rather us make an extra 20K in rates that DALPA negotiated to monetize it while it was valuable.
Who knows how to calculate what our profit sharing would be if Delta makes 10 Billion in one year?
Who knows how to calculate what our profit sharing would be if Delta makes 10 Billion in one year?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
