Originally Posted by Herkflyr

So "QOL" (what a ridiculous term...sort of like "inclusion" it is used so much in a flippant manner that no one really even knows what it means) now means that a reserve should not be able to be used by the company as a...reserve...so more guys in base can get premium pay to fly a trip that is easily assignable to a reserve and has been for decades prior?

Don't think the negotiators are going to be wasting much time pursuing that fantasy. Might as well say "QOL" by demanding premium pay for driving to work during rush hour. I mean doesn't that impact your "QOL?"

We need to work hard on improving the quality of our trips as we fly them (improved DH language, which has been mentioned recently, is a great example) and that is where we need to place our emphasis. Trying to restrict the company's ability to run the trip coverage sequence as it currently exists will take a bit more effort.

By the way, I agree that there are a few areas there which should be improved (such as the ability the company has to assign a trip to a reserve that conflicts with his regular line days off in the next month, all for no premium pay, when they could not do that if it interfered with his reserve days off!...that should never have been in the contract to begin with. However, that is not the same as just saying "reserves can only cover in base trips, period."

Originally Posted by TED74

I could be in a very small minority, but I could theoretically vote yes to a contract that increases PWA value by a billion dollars without touching pay rates. An increasing percentage of us have decades left and aren't topped out on anything yet (longevity, sick leave, vacation, category seniority). I'd like to strike now and insert QOL items into the PWA that will be hard to extricate in the years ahead. Our payrates generally won't wander far from industry standard, IMHO. And PS captures profitability if we remain an industry leader.

Originally Posted by Myfingershurt

Wouldn’t do any good. That would be just another contract item that would continuously be violated with no real repercussions.

Originally Posted by TED74

There's nothing ridiculous about the term QOL... just thinking that it has a narrow definition, or that anyone's personal definition is universal for everyone. For me, QOL items are any contractual changes that aren't explicitly or solely compensation (e.g., pay rates, vacation/training valuation, etc).

I could be in a very small minority, but I could theoretically vote yes to a contract that increases PWA value by a billion dollars without touching pay rates. An increasing percentage of us have decades left and aren't topped out on anything yet (longevity, sick leave, vacation, category seniority). I'd like to strike now and insert QOL items into the PWA that will be hard to extricate in the years ahead. Our payrates generally won't wander far from industry standard, IMHO. And PS captures profitability if we remain an industry leader.

Originally Posted by sailingfun

Costing is the biggest single part of contract negotiations. The company and union cost out every single item. In the end the company wants to have a reasonably competitive cost per block hour for pilots. Within that number they really don’t care where the money is spent.

Originally Posted by Denny Crane

And here is the reason for Ed’s comment that he will/wants to wait for United and AA to come to a contract agreement before us. If they don’t then he knows Delta will have to pony up big time. Whereas if he waits he can point to them and claim we will be non competitive if we get what we are asking for....

Denny

Originally Posted by BobZ

Seems us knocking it out early and ahead of aa ual wud put the greater preasure on our competition.

Originally Posted by Denny Crane

Agreed but Ed is trying to keep us from “knocking it out of the park” to keep costs down. Waiting for UAL and AA is his way of making sure we DON’T knock it out of the park or it makes it that much more difficult to do so.

Denny