|
|
Originally Posted by trustbutverify
(Post 2534563)
You keep using hypotheticals and what ifs so I'll do the same. I'll bet if you used the actual numbers we'd find out that bumping pax doesn't happen much at all (despite what might have happened at UAL) and that the result to our passenger experience and financial performance is next to nothing in the grand scheme of things.
On the other hand, one could prove pretty easily that you wouldn't be in the position you are right now at an airline job if it weren't for those retirees about to get screwed. I don't understand the purpose of your second paragraph. I was alluding that retirees may not actually be affected too much by this change, because the commuter clause already in place would have them bumped first anyway if it came down to it. If you think I am out to hurt retirees, you are mistaken. I have no power to change management's policy whatsoever. I am only discussing the pros and cons. |
Originally Posted by ContactTower
(Post 2534416)
I’m am an active Endeavor pilot and just for the record we never ask our management for travel priority over Delta’s retirees. When they announced it took us by surprise too. Can we blame management ? Probably not considering most of them are Delta employees including our new CEO Bill. From personal experience our pilot group doesn't ask for travel privileges, profit sharing, etc .. the only thing we would like is career progression (flow) to Delta.
Pass priorities are always an emotional topic but this isn't something that is in our contract. Its easy to forget that Mr. "Retention Bonus" himself was the one who gave (or signed off on at least) the bulk of the current pass benefit structure we enjoy today, and around the same time as that came unlimited jumpseats. Not to give him too much credit, as pass bennies and jumpseat privileges were on an upward trajectory industry wide anyway of course. If I had to guess the reason for the recent change, which by all accounts appears to have taken all sides by surprise, I'd wager to say the HMFBIC's (head master finance beancounters in charge) did it to facilitate more pilots getting to work in a no cost (to them) kind of way. Fewer missed trips, fewer commuter clause invocations (I assume they have one), etc. Is the change right or wrong? Is it a courageous statement of equality and justice for 9E, or is it a stinging rebuke of a lifetime of dedication and service for DL retirees? IMO the real answer is neither, because neither group "owns" the benefit contractually. Things have been so good for so long that no one has felt the need to spend any "negotiating capital" on it, other than possibly commuter clauses. Its been mostly (almost completely) left to the mercies of management, and so they've made this one small change to grease the gears a little at their largest and WO regional. It wasn't personal, it was just business. |
Originally Posted by poopplop
(Post 2534573)
Feel free to enlighten us with the actual numbers then... I've given you a recent documented example and a common sense hypothetical. Also, you know how much Delta protects their brand. It is worth something to them, even if it is not for you. If you are so sure of the effects being minuscule, feel free to post them. Otherwise, you are in no position to talk in such a way.
I don't understand the purpose of your second paragraph. I was alluding that retirees may not actually be affected too much by this change, because the commuter clause already in place would have them bumped first anyway if it came down to it. If you think I am out to hurt retirees, you are mistaken. I have no power to change management's policy whatsoever. I am only discussing the pros and cons. |
Originally Posted by trustbutverify
(Post 2534595)
Let's get something straight - you are the one making some grandiose claims about protecting the brand and increasing our profit sharing, so the burden of proof is on you. And one UAL event to prove your point? You got me there. I'll just defer to your wisdom and wait for the big bump in my profit sharing check next year thanks to your new non-rev bennies. Because that's what this is really about, you are watering at the mouth over the increase in leisure travel non-rev status, not the improvement to the DL brand or financial performance. You my friend, are not fooling anyone. But do carry on with your words of wisdom about improving my profit sharing and DL brand integrity with your nov-rev improvement.
|
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 2534588)
This right here.
Pass priorities are always an emotional topic but this isn't something that is in our contract. Its easy to forget that Mr. "Retention Bonus" himself was the one who gave (or signed off on at least) the bulk of the current pass benefit structure we enjoy today, and around the same time as that came unlimited jumpseats. Not to give him too much credit, as pass bennies and jumpseat privileges were on an upward trajectory industry wide anyway of course. If I had to guess the reason for the recent change, which by all accounts appears to have taken all sides by surprise, I'd wager to say the HMFBIC's (head master finance beancounters in charge) did it to facilitate more pilots getting to work in a no cost (to them) kind of way. Fewer missed trips, fewer commuter clause invocations (I assume they have one), etc. Is the change right or wrong? Is it a courageous statement of equality and justice for 9E, or is it a stinging rebuke of a lifetime of dedication and service for DL retirees? IMO the real answer is neither, because neither group "owns" the benefit contractually. Things have been so good for so long that no one has felt the need to spend any "negotiating capital" on it, other than possibly commuter clauses. Its been mostly (almost completely) left to the mercies of management, and so they've made this one small change to grease the gears a little at their largest and WO regional. It wasn't personal, it was just business. |
Originally Posted by Mesabah
(Post 2534604)
Does Poopaloop even work at 9E, we don't have ERJs.
|
Originally Posted by Mesabah
(Post 2534604)
Does Poopaloop even work at 9E, we don't have ERJs.
|
Originally Posted by trustbutverify
(Post 2534595)
Let's get something straight - you are the one making some grandiose claims about protecting the brand and increasing our profit sharing, so the burden of proof is on you. And one UAL event to prove your point? You got me there. I'll just defer to your wisdom and wait for the big bump in my profit sharing check next year thanks to your new non-rev bennies. Because that's what this is really about, you are watering at the mouth over the increase in leisure travel non-rev status, not the improvement to the DL brand or financial performance. You my friend, are not fooling anyone. But do carry on with your words of wisdom about improving my profit sharing and DL brand integrity with your nov-rev improvement.
|
Originally Posted by Speed Select
(Post 2534421)
I don’t think anyone is bitter. The issue is the diluting of earned benefits. The rule change is driven by one thing: Delta’s balance sheet. Hence, the opportunity/appropriateness of this to be addressed by ALPA.
As far as earning full Delta benefits, I suggest applying to mainline. Delta is currently hiring the best qualified candidates in the industry through proven screening and interview process. I remember where I came from (ASA and ANG), and that stoked my motivation to move on to a more lucrative career with a major. At this point, I’m not interested in diluting my near or long term benefits for the false argument of getting 9E pilots to work (ref: 9E commuter clause; BTW, I gladly give up the Jumpseat to anyone going to work). For those who don’t think others want a bite of our profit sharing, read above. As is the case with non-con employees, management decides how PS is allocated. I got turned by a very strange interviewing crew the first time through the SSP. I got hired by a very strange interviewing crew six month later through the SSP. I was not happy with the first refusal; I did not even study for the second attempt. It's a strange process for hiring pilots. They told me first time that I didn't pass the written/aptitude test. Unless you show me the actual results of my test, you're 'lying'! Delta never shows the results of an 'objective' test. Strangely, six months later I was the guy they really wanted (a guy who didn't really care and didn't really prepare) 'through proven screening and interview process'. . In my best belief, I did better in my first written/aptitude test than my second. Best pilots? Huh...ask the captain on a recent flight from MSP to LGA for an ILS approach to 22 at LGA with circle to land 13, how his ass was saved by a brand new Delta F/O, former 9E, who told him not to turn left - a turn he initiated already - but, to turn right. A 21 year pilot at Delta...oh yes, a Navy guy who spent 2 hours and 3 minutes telling me his exploits in the Navy. Proven by who? |
Originally Posted by Max Glide
(Post 2534843)
Proven by who?
I got turned by a very strange interviewing crew the first time through the SSP. I got hired by a very strange interviewing crew six month later through the SSP. I was not happy with the first refusal; I did not even study for the second attempt. It's a strange process for hiring pilots. They told me first time that I didn't pass the written/aptitude test. Unless you show me the actual results of my test, you're 'lying'! Delta never shows the results of an 'objective' test. Strangely, six months later I was the guy they really wanted (a guy who didn't really care and didn't really prepare) 'through proven screening and interview process'. . In my best belief, I did better in my first written/aptitude test than my second. Best pilots? Huh...ask the captain on a recent flight from MSP to LGA for an ILS approach to 22 at LGA with circle to land 13, how his ass was saved by a brand new Delta F/O, former 9E, who told him not to turn left - a turn he initiated already - but, to turn right. A 21 year pilot at Delta...oh yes, a Navy guy who spent 2 hours and 3 minutes telling me his exploits in the Navy. Proven by who? Dude, Let it go. No hiring system is perfect and even the best hiring and screening practices, yes even "proven ones" are not 100%. There will always be good folks rejected and some "strange rangers" that make it through. Just look at NASA - not many jobs screen so selectively from such a highly qualified pool..............and yet they hired a wack job that drove halfway across the country wearing a diaper to assault a sexual competitor. You really cant make this stuff any wackier. As for "saving" your Captain - good job, sounds like our hiring department made the right choice with you. :) I doubt you will ever make a mistake in your career but if you do, hopefully your fellow crew-member will have your back just as you had your Captains back. I for one will wait until I am retired on the porch with a scotch in hand before I start criticizing my fellow crew-members. :D Scoop |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:42 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands