Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > Delta
Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? >

Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Search
Notices

Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-18-2017, 05:54 PM
  #193281  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,909
Default

... to clarify, I'm happy to discuss ways previous contracts were BETTER than what we have now. It just doesn't help to detail all the ways they were worse.
TED74 is offline  
Old 09-18-2017, 05:55 PM
  #193282  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Denny Crane's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: Kickin’ Back
Posts: 6,971
Default

Originally Posted by notEnuf View Post
ALV +15 was also recent, and a bad give. That's guarantee +17 usually. It used to be just ALV.
You are not telling the whole story here. As you point out, one can technically be flown to a max of guarantee +17...........but, once one's credit reaches or exceeds the reserve guarantee by that max of +17 (at the conclusion of a trip), s/he is no longer available. It doesn't matter if it's by 0 minutes or 17 hours.

It's a big window that should be smaller.........but it is a window. I would say a 10 hour window should be flexible enough for the company.

Denny
Denny Crane is offline  
Old 09-18-2017, 06:11 PM
  #193283  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Denny Crane's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: Kickin’ Back
Posts: 6,971
Default

Originally Posted by TED74 View Post
If your goal is to make sure people know the system has improved, I agree. And if someone proposes a change that would take us backwards, I fully support educating them on why it would be a step in the wrong direction.

My beef is with folks prefacing any improvements to reserve with "I know it used to be worse in ways X, Y and Z, so we really have it pretty good". We don't do that with pay, right? If we're worth something better, we need not undercut that argument with discussion about how our starting point could be much worse.

To answer your question "How does one know an "improvement" is an improvement unless you compare it to what you used to have?"... my whole point is that what we (you) USED to have is nearly irrelevant. What we have NOW is what we are trying to improve upon. We won't compare our next pay rates to C2012, we'll (hopefully) compare them to C2016... why do we consistently discuss reserve differently?
It seems to me that you only want to compare any "improvments" to our current contract. I disagree...and I'll use your example of payrates. We had pretty good payrates after the 2001 Contract. We got, how shall I say it, "hosed" (think of another 4 letter word that ends in ed) just before and in bankruptcy to the tune of a total 46% loss. With your way of thinking, anything better than bankruptcy wages in the next contract was an improvement........and it was until you compared it to the 2001 Contract. We did not exceed those rates again until not too long ago.........wasn't it 2012?

I understand your point but I think you are taking it a bit too far and reading too much into guys who bring up how things "used" to be.

Denny
Denny Crane is offline  
Old 09-18-2017, 06:21 PM
  #193284  
Super Moderator
 
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 6,868
Default

Originally Posted by TED74 View Post
What is achieved by comparing current Reserve to past Reserve? If something needs to be improved, let's just improve it.

Lowering standards (intentionally or otherwise) by telling people all the ways reserve has been or could be worse does our negotiating effort a disservice. Anchoring phenomenon is very real, and the more we talk amongst ourselves about how great we have it, the smaller the improvement(s) that will satisfy the masses. That's a company win.

You say - "If something needs to be improved, lets just improve it."

Well if 75% of the Pilots think reserve is currently good, because we remember when it really sucked, then it won't get much traction among the Pilot group - nor should it. And you know what else- everything in our contract can be improved so determining what "needs" to be improved would obviously be key.

Just off the top of my head I personally would rather improve:

Scope - Especially top end JV Scope.
Vacation - Ours is pretty much the industry laggard.
Medical - Ours is basically catastrophic care.
DH Policy - Ours Blows.

And there are plenty others. These are things that have not only not gotten better but for the most part have gotten worse. That is why we look at what we used to have vs what we have now vs what we want.

I also would like to see reserve improved but it is not at the top of my list, sorry if that is "Lowering standards" in your book.




Scoop
Scoop is offline  
Old 09-18-2017, 06:29 PM
  #193285  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,909
Default

Originally Posted by Denny Crane View Post
It seems to me that you only want to compare any "improvments" to our current contract. I disagree...and I'll use your example of payrates. We had pretty good payrates after the 2001 Contract. We got, how shall I say it, "hosed" (think of another 4 letter word that ends in ed) just before and in bankruptcy to the tune of a total 46% loss. With your way of thinking, anything better than bankruptcy wages in the next contract was an improvement........and it was until you compared it to the 2001 Contract. We did not exceed those rates again until not too long ago.........wasn't it 2012?

I understand your point but I think you are taking it a bit too far and reading too much into guys who bring up how things "used" to be.

Denny
I think you misunderstand my way of thinking, although maybe I just have poor reading comprehension. I am happy to point to ANY historic contract and identify ways reserve used to be better than it is now, then set that as a goal to be met or exceeded in C2019. Also happy to look to competitors reserve ADVANTAGES for inspiration. Since I don't work for management, I myself won't cite the ways in which our competitors have it worse.

Guys can clearly bring up ways things used to be. When those things were worse than what we have now, though, they lower expectations (in my humble opinion). All of this is psych 101, mirroring why our opener needs to greatly exceed our desired end state. Folks claiming that our reserve only needs minor changes increase the likelihood that such minor changes are all we'll get (if we get any at all). In my personal experience, those types of bar-lowering history lessons come from pilots who don't sit reserve much and/or don't expect to going forward. Naturally, it's their right to seek to minimize contractual improvements from which they won't benefit in hopes of maximizing those from which they will.
TED74 is offline  
Old 09-18-2017, 06:40 PM
  #193286  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,909
Default

Originally Posted by Scoop View Post
You say - "If something needs to be improved, lets just improve it."

Well if 75% of the Pilots think reserve is currently good, because we remember when it really sucked, then it won't get much traction among the Pilot group - nor should it. And you know what else- everything in our contract can be improved so determining what "needs" to be improved would obviously be key.

Just off the top of my head I personally would rather improve:

Scope - Especially top end JV Scope.
Vacation - Ours is pretty much the industry laggard.
Medical - Ours is basically catastrophic care.
DH Policy - Ours Blows.

And there are plenty others. These are things that have not only not gotten better but for the most part have gotten worse. That is why we look at what we used to have vs what we have now vs what we want.

I also would like to see reserve improved but it is not at the top of my list, sorry if that is "Lowering standards" in your book.




Scoop
I can't disagree with anything you say here. And I appreciate the acknowledgement that historic reserve discussions undercut efforts to improve it. I happen to think your four items are more important, but I don't think they necessitate freezing out reserve improvements.

It won't be long before 50% of voters have only known C2012 and beyond, FWIW. There will be good and bad from that demographic shift.
TED74 is offline  
Old 09-19-2017, 03:00 AM
  #193287  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Left seat of a little plane
Posts: 2,397
Default

The coverage buckets are not part of the coverage sequence in the PWA.
Sure they are. You might have meant "the coverage buckets are not part of the process for assigning short call," which would be a correct statement.

23. N. or O. depending on the time frame only discusses RUO which is reserve usage order. Of which, I still have been unable to obtain a written copy.
What do you mean "I still have been unable to obtain a written copy?" Isn't the pdf version of the contract "a written copy?"

There seems to be a lot of company discretion.
There is ZERO company discretion--there is the contract and it is explicit--that's what it is there for.

“Reserve utilization order” (RUO) means an order of assigning open time to reserve pilots, within days-of-availability groupings, that is based upon a comparison of their RAW value groupings.
And there you yourself quoted it, and I added the emphasis. RUO definition is from section one, and that is where the reserve "buckets" are specifically mentioned, and section 23 specifically states that the RUO is taken into consideration when assigning trips to reserves.

It is also a great system that ensures that reserves "mostly" fly or don't fly at roughly the same rate across the category, while not letting very small differences in RAW score result in one pilot flying when he didn't want to, while there is another who wished to, both of whom are in "roughly" the same group of guys.

SRH page 64 is really the only help.
And I think it a great help. However, the SRH is "merely" a user-friendly summary of contractual language that is already there, and has been for years.
Herkflyr is offline  
Old 09-19-2017, 03:18 AM
  #193288  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Left seat of a little plane
Posts: 2,397
Default

Originally Posted by notEnuf View Post
ALV +15 was also recent, and a bad give. That's guarantee +17 usually. It used to be just ALV.
True, but...when it was just ALV, if you had vacation, MLOA etc, NONE of that applied to the ALV value in terms of what scheduling could assign. So if you had a week of vacation, scheduling could assign you flying up to the ALV in just the remaining three weeks. Now you have your own "personal" max reserve in such months, which is far less.

For all the senior guys who are bidding reserve these days (who never would have before) that is a big difference, since they have vacation 3-5 months of the year.

That is not saying that the ALV+15 rule change was great, but it did come with an important side item that didn't exist before.
Herkflyr is offline  
Old 09-19-2017, 03:21 AM
  #193289  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,909
Default

Originally Posted by Herkflyr View Post
It is also a great system that ensures that reserves "mostly" fly or don't fly at roughly the same rate across the category, while not letting very small differences in RAW score result in one pilot flying when he didn't want to, while there is another who wished to, both of whom are in "roughly" the same group of guys.
Great system for whom? There is a wide variance across most (if not all) categories with regards to how much pilots WANT to fly while on reserve. Normalizing this and treating everyone identically degrades quality of life at both ends of the spectrum. I'm happy to insert language to avoid reserve pilots going to the sim for bounces (Maybe pecking order changes when one doesn't have required T/O and Lands at 60 day mark? Maybe different categories need different systems?). It's just silly to have one pilot sit in a self-funded hotel while another who wants to be in his own bed is off flying around the world instead.
TED74 is offline  
Old 09-19-2017, 04:16 AM
  #193290  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,273
Default

Originally Posted by Herkflyr View Post
True, but...when it was just ALV, if you had vacation, MLOA etc, NONE of that applied to the ALV value in terms of what scheduling could assign. So if you had a week of vacation, scheduling could assign you flying up to the ALV in just the remaining three weeks. Now you have your own "personal" max reserve in such months, which is far less.

For all the senior guys who are bidding reserve these days (who never would have before) that is a big difference, since they have vacation 3-5 months of the year.

That is not saying that the ALV+15 rule change was great, but it did come with an important side item that didn't exist before.
In addition when you are full was reduced by two hours as part of that package.
sailingfun is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
On Autopilot
Regional
22594
11-05-2021 07:03 AM
AeroCrewSolut
Delta
153
08-14-2018 12:18 PM
Bill Lumberg
Major
71
06-13-2012 08:36 AM
Quagmire
Major
253
04-16-2011 06:19 AM
JiffyLube
Major
12
03-07-2008 04:27 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices