Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
01-29-2010, 07:22 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: Kickin’ Back
Posts: 6,971
I agree that we should go to the company and ask to negotiate our contract early so as to have a new one in place by the amendable date. But I see the company balking at that at least until there is some sort of resolution with the FA union and the IAM.
Denny
Denny
01-29-2010, 07:27 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
I figure that once the other groups decide on representation you may see Section Six open. I would think it would be a waste for us and them(company) until then.
As for what we will shoot for, it all depends on the economic modeling that our opener is based off of. We have a high probability that we are entering a period of large profits. All know this.
With PBS on the books that saves the company well over a billion a year just on staffing. 32% reserves versus the current 11-12% that they normally will staff a category at. That will always remain.
My point is that even if you go for C2K plus, it is for hourly rates alone, not the total cost of the contract. Furthermore, if you got the buying power of C2K it still would not equate to the same cost as the C2K contract in today's dollars. Like I mentioned above, PBS, retirements, medical etc have all been reworked and as a result what ppl are asking for at C2K+30 will still not equal the same cost.
I am not stating a suggestion to an opening position, I am just stated that we need to compare apples to apples. There are things like reserve rules, and their savings that have to be costed out and compared. We are playing by a different game book now. We are not just looking at hourly rates and equating them to total cost.
For fun:
Our 5% bump: 4% hourly plus 1% DC match equated to about 90 million to our cost for FY2010. (Numbers stated by our MEC if you are looking for a reference)
So for each percent you get it will cost about 18 million in total cost give or take off of this years numbers
Ergo to gain a raise of 50% it will cost 900 million per year, or less than half of our debt service.
A raise of 20% is 360 million
A raise of 30% is 540 million
A raise of 40% is 720 million and so on.
Of course this is just on hourly rates, and once you include other must haves like 23K issues, Reserve issues, the six week of vacation restoration, DC match, sick bank, ect the cost will go way up
Point I was trying to make is that because of the changes since the 2001 contract in almost everything, stating you want X in wages does not equate to the same total contract cost.
Fire Away, Patrick will not understand it anyway.
As for what we will shoot for, it all depends on the economic modeling that our opener is based off of. We have a high probability that we are entering a period of large profits. All know this.
With PBS on the books that saves the company well over a billion a year just on staffing. 32% reserves versus the current 11-12% that they normally will staff a category at. That will always remain.
My point is that even if you go for C2K plus, it is for hourly rates alone, not the total cost of the contract. Furthermore, if you got the buying power of C2K it still would not equate to the same cost as the C2K contract in today's dollars. Like I mentioned above, PBS, retirements, medical etc have all been reworked and as a result what ppl are asking for at C2K+30 will still not equal the same cost.
I am not stating a suggestion to an opening position, I am just stated that we need to compare apples to apples. There are things like reserve rules, and their savings that have to be costed out and compared. We are playing by a different game book now. We are not just looking at hourly rates and equating them to total cost.
For fun:
Our 5% bump: 4% hourly plus 1% DC match equated to about 90 million to our cost for FY2010. (Numbers stated by our MEC if you are looking for a reference)
So for each percent you get it will cost about 18 million in total cost give or take off of this years numbers
Ergo to gain a raise of 50% it will cost 900 million per year, or less than half of our debt service.
A raise of 20% is 360 million
A raise of 30% is 540 million
A raise of 40% is 720 million and so on.
Of course this is just on hourly rates, and once you include other must haves like 23K issues, Reserve issues, the six week of vacation restoration, DC match, sick bank, ect the cost will go way up
Point I was trying to make is that because of the changes since the 2001 contract in almost everything, stating you want X in wages does not equate to the same total contract cost.
Fire Away, Patrick will not understand it anyway.
01-29-2010, 07:30 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
Originally Posted by FIIGMO
New,
I am certain we will have the leading contract (we do deserve it and the revenue stream this airline will garner in the future dictates it). My point is that ALL at once has it own set of issues and we are not at that point yet. So why not stop giving away things for nothing now? Get something, any % is better than zero. Don't allow the MEC to side negotiate without extracting some real benefits and changes. I feel with all the stuff this airline wants to do they will be back talking to the MEC more than a few times for contractual relief. Not knowing what calamity or $230 oil will take place or happen in 2012, lets put some things into the contract that get us closer to that industry leading contract now.
I am certain we will have the leading contract (we do deserve it and the revenue stream this airline will garner in the future dictates it). My point is that ALL at once has it own set of issues and we are not at that point yet. So why not stop giving away things for nothing now? Get something, any % is better than zero. Don't allow the MEC to side negotiate without extracting some real benefits and changes. I feel with all the stuff this airline wants to do they will be back talking to the MEC more than a few times for contractual relief. Not knowing what calamity or $230 oil will take place or happen in 2012, lets put some things into the contract that get us closer to that industry leading contract now.
Last edited by newKnow; 01-29-2010 at 07:53 AM.
01-29-2010, 07:44 AM
Banned
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Space Shuttle PIC
Posts: 2,007
You guys have cool avatars. I have never figured out how to get one. Can anyone give me some help?
01-29-2010, 07:48 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Originally Posted by newKnow
If Delta pilots don't get an industry leading contract, who will?
I expect that we'll get that industry leading contract because Delta will be the most profitable. That's why the Delta pilots supported the DAL-NWA merger and support rational industry consolidation.
Fire away, Carl!
01-29-2010, 07:49 AM
Underboob King
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Guppy Commander
Posts: 4,412
the MEC has a special session for next week, wonder what that has to do with.....
01-29-2010, 07:55 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by Superpilot92
the MEC has a special session for next week, wonder what that has to do with.....
01-29-2010, 07:56 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by slowplay
Whoever works for the most profitable airline will get the industry leading contract..
I expect that we'll get that industry leading contract because Delta will be the most profitable. That's why the Delta pilots supported the DAL-NWA merger and support rational industry consolidation.
Fire away, Carl!
I expect that we'll get that industry leading contract because Delta will be the most profitable. That's why the Delta pilots supported the DAL-NWA merger and support rational industry consolidation.
Fire away, Carl!
Missed ya the last few days.....
01-29-2010, 08:15 AM
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Originally Posted by Check Essential
Carl-
I share your fears about the low expectations among some pilots and I'm with you in spirit, but -
I think the way the NMB operates nowadays has made "Section 6" almost meaningless. Amendable dates have become meaningless. Witness the number of pilot groups that are years beyond their amendable date and still far from agreement.
The NMB is never going to release American Airlines. They certainly will never release Delta. Huge airlines have become akin to public utilities. Too vital to the economy for the govt to ever allow a total shutdown. The NMB is theoretically an independent agency but they have become captives of the administration and Congress, neither of which wants to see an airline strike. We are, in effect, just like the air controllers. We are operating under a de facto no strike clause and management knows it.
I think Lee Moak and DALPA realize that as well. They say they are committed to incremental contract improvements when the opportunities arise. I agree with that strategy but I think we need to impress upon them that the membership wants the next LOA or JV or whatever to be that opportunity. No more freebies.
In the longer term, we've got to find new and innovative ways to exert pressure on management to achieve our contractual goals short of full-blown section 6 self-help. The APA "set your hair on fire" methods have clearly been ineffective. There has to be a better way.
The RLA is broken. It doesn't work anymore. Finding the new way forward in labor relations under the RLA should be the focus of our energy.
I share your fears about the low expectations among some pilots and I'm with you in spirit, but -
I think the way the NMB operates nowadays has made "Section 6" almost meaningless. Amendable dates have become meaningless. Witness the number of pilot groups that are years beyond their amendable date and still far from agreement.
The NMB is never going to release American Airlines. They certainly will never release Delta. Huge airlines have become akin to public utilities. Too vital to the economy for the govt to ever allow a total shutdown. The NMB is theoretically an independent agency but they have become captives of the administration and Congress, neither of which wants to see an airline strike. We are, in effect, just like the air controllers. We are operating under a de facto no strike clause and management knows it.
I think Lee Moak and DALPA realize that as well. They say they are committed to incremental contract improvements when the opportunities arise. I agree with that strategy but I think we need to impress upon them that the membership wants the next LOA or JV or whatever to be that opportunity. No more freebies.
In the longer term, we've got to find new and innovative ways to exert pressure on management to achieve our contractual goals short of full-blown section 6 self-help. The APA "set your hair on fire" methods have clearly been ineffective. There has to be a better way.
The RLA is broken. It doesn't work anymore. Finding the new way forward in labor relations under the RLA should be the focus of our energy.
As I've said before, Lee Moak made it clear to the Wall Street bankers who would have financed the USAir purchase of Delta, that it would be very difficult for them to operate an airline with extremely angry pilots. I think I know what he meant by that. I know Delta management was thrilled to hear of our willingness to use such a weapon. But that weapon cuts both ways if management is looking to extend negotiations for years after the amendable date.
We MUST find out the company's position on this right now, not in 2012.
Carl
01-29-2010, 08:23 AM
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Originally Posted by slowplay
Whoever works for the most profitable airline will get the industry leading contract..
I expect that we'll get that industry leading contract because Delta will be the most profitable. That's why the Delta pilots supported the DAL-NWA merger and support rational industry consolidation.
Fire away, Carl!
I expect that we'll get that industry leading contract because Delta will be the most profitable. That's why the Delta pilots supported the DAL-NWA merger and support rational industry consolidation.
Fire away, Carl!
We must demand an industry leading contract. Even if it is just 1 percent higher than Southwest, it must be the minimum that we will accept. If management needs below industry pilot costs in order to compete profitably, that is an illustration of management ineffectiveness - and thus, not our problem.
Carl
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
