Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
Didn't hear it, looking on the news sites for anything on it.
Didn't see that one coming.
The point is to make is contractural, if the company wants them to fly under these conditions--so be it.
I thnk we agree more than not. I just don't want any kind of fines levied by the union or the company. That is scary. If flying over X hours with guys on furlough is in the contract is not allowed, then scheduling should not be allowed to use a pilot when said limit is reached..
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
[quote=Scoop;741944]
Nope, from a negotiator...I guess we brought it to the company during contract 2000 and they didn't want it.
Longevity pay erases seniority for eqp/pay. All you have left is QOL and QOL in the trips you could get. For instance, if I could stay here in ATL on the 88 and make the same I am right now on the ER in NY, I would do it in a second. Yeah, the trips aren't as great....but the half a day I lose commuting on either end would totally make up for it.
There will still be the ability to downbid for lifestyle too...but it takes MANY dudes out of the equation who are bidding up just to make cash.
I think we have to bring longevity based pay to the table. Like UPS.
Think about what a huge deal it would be for the system vis a vis commuters.
Prof,
Not sure how longevity pay would help commuters. The way we are set up today some guys willingly downbid for better senority and QOL - I don't think this would be possible with longevity pay. In any case I think it should be looked at in detail by the union but my guess is that they have already looked at it or decided against it.
Scoop
Think about what a huge deal it would be for the system vis a vis commuters.
Prof,
Not sure how longevity pay would help commuters. The way we are set up today some guys willingly downbid for better senority and QOL - I don't think this would be possible with longevity pay. In any case I think it should be looked at in detail by the union but my guess is that they have already looked at it or decided against it.
Scoop
Longevity pay erases seniority for eqp/pay. All you have left is QOL and QOL in the trips you could get. For instance, if I could stay here in ATL on the 88 and make the same I am right now on the ER in NY, I would do it in a second. Yeah, the trips aren't as great....but the half a day I lose commuting on either end would totally make up for it.
There will still be the ability to downbid for lifestyle too...but it takes MANY dudes out of the equation who are bidding up just to make cash.
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
[quote=Scoop;741944]
I'm not sure it would help anyone. The trend, since Orville's solo, has been towards bigger and bigger aircraft. Airlines tried to go against natural evolution witht the 50-seat RJ's, and we're are still wearing the huge welt on our behinds from that experiment.
As new (and bigger) airfcraft come on property and bring more revenue, I think we should be rewarded accordingly. With longevity pay, you're closing off one avenue for pattern-bargaining.
Furthermore, I agree with Scoop on commuters. Everyone gets to downbid, or bid up, and take advantage of the little intersections between pay and seniority in category. It lets senior people find a pond to swim in where they can be even more senior, and junior people get to choose to be minnows in the big pool, if they so choose.
Count me as "one against" longevity pay.
I think we have to bring longevity based pay to the table. Like UPS.
Think about what a huge deal it would be for the system vis a vis commuters.
Prof,
Not sure how longevity pay would help commuters. The way we are set up today some guys willingly downbid for better senority and QOL - I don't think this would be possible with longevity pay. In any case I think it should be looked at in detail by the union but my guess is that they have already looked at it or decided against it.
Scoop
Think about what a huge deal it would be for the system vis a vis commuters.
Prof,
Not sure how longevity pay would help commuters. The way we are set up today some guys willingly downbid for better senority and QOL - I don't think this would be possible with longevity pay. In any case I think it should be looked at in detail by the union but my guess is that they have already looked at it or decided against it.
Scoop
As new (and bigger) airfcraft come on property and bring more revenue, I think we should be rewarded accordingly. With longevity pay, you're closing off one avenue for pattern-bargaining.
Furthermore, I agree with Scoop on commuters. Everyone gets to downbid, or bid up, and take advantage of the little intersections between pay and seniority in category. It lets senior people find a pond to swim in where they can be even more senior, and junior people get to choose to be minnows in the big pool, if they so choose.
Count me as "one against" longevity pay.
It just changes which positions go junior. Meanwhile it allows for QOL and pay to go hand in hand. We will be able to fly what we like best and get the best paycheck our seniority allows.
I'm not sure what you mean by your first sentence.
But the second... How can we ever stack it in our favor. management ALWAYS has the capability to cry poor, and threaten us with bankruptcy, and they ALWAYS have the option to just wait us out. Hint: No strike... I just can't understand how we can ever truly claim any kind of victory under these conditions. If Prater weren't so gutless, maybe this would change... but I'm not holding my breath. BTW.. I think secretaries at alpa national make more than you do....
But the second... How can we ever stack it in our favor. management ALWAYS has the capability to cry poor, and threaten us with bankruptcy, and they ALWAYS have the option to just wait us out. Hint: No strike... I just can't understand how we can ever truly claim any kind of victory under these conditions. If Prater weren't so gutless, maybe this would change... but I'm not holding my breath. BTW.. I think secretaries at alpa national make more than you do....
My point in the first sentence was that if you can win just give up, de-certify ALPA and just give up is kind of like slapping yourself.
It is hard to stack the deck in our favor, the system is set up that way, and is magnified now that we are well past deregulation. What we can do it not stack it against us.
Great point that imo is the feeling of many Delta pilots. There IS money out there.
Millions will go to Delta execs this year
Hundreds of Millions offered to JAL
Millions spent purchasing hundreds of RJ's to OUTSOURCE our jobs since BK.
Bottom line is that most Delta pilots feel that is some low hanging fruit to be had.
Millions will go to Delta execs this year
Hundreds of Millions offered to JAL
Millions spent purchasing hundreds of RJ's to OUTSOURCE our jobs since BK.
Bottom line is that most Delta pilots feel that is some low hanging fruit to be had.
Lets not mince what I am trying to say.
Point to my rant is that if you think that JAL is not a good deal for us, then you are mistaken. Securing this deal gets you closer to our goals than doing everything we can to prevent it.
I am still the guy that wants to keep DALPA and the company accountable. I am just siding with the need to make this deal happen. Not at any cost, but more a long the lines that we do not need to work at preventing it.
Our raise costs the company 90 million this year. We have a large multiplier. Our overall costs are exasperated by our size. That is the truth.
I personally feel that we could rework section 23 and help three out right now but like I have said many do not want to open section 6.
People need to realize that we are not going to get what we want if we do not see a modification of this business model. It will not survive till 2015 if changes are not made.
I could get it to our seat pricing modeling etc, but it really does not matter. We need to be able to carry passengers at a set margin with the capacity we have. Until then we will continue to dump seats at the last minute.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post




