Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
06-17-2010 | 12:58 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 602
Likes: 0
From: SLC 767ER Captain
To jab: Please refresh my memory on the FNWA 07/08 exclusion. The last thing I remember about that issue was pulling up the ladder. Just kidding of course. I’m all for equality and fairness. If it means getting something changed, then so be it. I spent way too many years (I think it was either 3 or 5) on a B scale. I know what inequality is. When we were on the B scale we were told that this allowed more pilots to be hired and if we weren’t on the B scale we probably wouldn’t have been hired at all. Smoke screens were blown up our arses. The truth was that the senior guys were not going to give a dime to us newbees. The old guys assured us that when we got to be senior it would all pay off. What a crock. IT NEVER WORKS OUT IN THE WASH. I also remember an Eastern Captain friend of mine losing his pension. I was sure glad that was never going to happen to me. Poor Bastard.
06-17-2010 | 01:01 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 667
Likes: 0
From: 737n/FO
Ferd;
Trust me I get that the brunt of the changes have been on you, but I get the distinct impression that there will be changes ahead that will be new for me and you, and some that will be old to you and new to me. I beleive that it has been stated that there are 350 items they want to revisit now that SOC is complete. I also understand that the checklist philosophy is the first to get the rework. One thing that is changing is the number of times we check altimeters. Not so sure about flaps!
When it comes to IT, DAL has admitted that NWA had the superior product and is working on new software that will be able to talk to programs like SAP, Cornerstone, and a bunch of other pilots know nothing about. Point is that it was a sprint to the start line of this merger. Now that SOC is done we get to take our time fixing what the knew was fixable but did not have the time.
As for the comments about all of the other QOL and bennies. Yep, we have a long list of needs not just wants going in to 2012, and we need to get some true gains in these LOA's. No one discredits that. What guys like me hate seeing is rehashing items that cannot be changed, and the net result is division.
Write your reps, talk to your CP, heck e-mail the bosses of both ALPA and the company. Do what you think needs to be done. In the end if you cannot stand it, volunteer for a position in ALPA. Get involved, understand the issues that strap each issue. If you want change the best way is to engage and be part of it.
Trust me I get that the brunt of the changes have been on you, but I get the distinct impression that there will be changes ahead that will be new for me and you, and some that will be old to you and new to me. I beleive that it has been stated that there are 350 items they want to revisit now that SOC is complete. I also understand that the checklist philosophy is the first to get the rework. One thing that is changing is the number of times we check altimeters. Not so sure about flaps!
When it comes to IT, DAL has admitted that NWA had the superior product and is working on new software that will be able to talk to programs like SAP, Cornerstone, and a bunch of other pilots know nothing about. Point is that it was a sprint to the start line of this merger. Now that SOC is done we get to take our time fixing what the knew was fixable but did not have the time.
As for the comments about all of the other QOL and bennies. Yep, we have a long list of needs not just wants going in to 2012, and we need to get some true gains in these LOA's. No one discredits that. What guys like me hate seeing is rehashing items that cannot be changed, and the net result is division.
Write your reps, talk to your CP, heck e-mail the bosses of both ALPA and the company. Do what you think needs to be done. In the end if you cannot stand it, volunteer for a position in ALPA. Get involved, understand the issues that strap each issue. If you want change the best way is to engage and be part of it.
Well said - let's move forward!!!!!!!!
06-17-2010 | 01:02 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
ACL,
Who had time to read it? I know I voted yes because it really didn't matter, a no vote got us nothing. We weren't going to go back and re-look at things, so the NWA MEC just said we're voting on a "mature" contract that had more upside than downsides. But, I think you're seeing some of the buyer's remorse on here from time to time.
All we can do is hope for something better going forward in 2012.
Who had time to read it? I know I voted yes because it really didn't matter, a no vote got us nothing. We weren't going to go back and re-look at things, so the NWA MEC just said we're voting on a "mature" contract that had more upside than downsides. But, I think you're seeing some of the buyer's remorse on here from time to time.
All we can do is hope for something better going forward in 2012.
For the UAL/CAL guys, there is a lesson in this somewhere. You can't just simply pick the "better" contract.
06-17-2010 | 01:05 PM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
Pwa 26.4 A:1
06-17-2010 | 01:05 PM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
Plan
Year
DC Plan Flat
Percentage of
earnings
2008 4.0%
2009 4.5%
2010 6.0%
2011 8.0%
2012 9.0%*
* If the minimum funding requirement under Section 402 of the Pension
Protection Act of 2006 for the NWA Pension Plan for the plan year beginning
October 1, 2011 is less than $15 million, then the DC Plan flat percentage of
earnings will instead be 10% for earnings paid on and after April 1, 2012;
11% for earnings paid on and after July 1, 2012; and 12% for earnings paid on
and after October 1, 2012. If the minimum funding requirement equals or
exceeds $15 million, the DC Plan flat percentage of earnings will be increased
from 9% to 12% effective for earnings paid after December 31, 2012. The
Company’s actuary will determine the funding requirement by December 31,
2011 and the Company will review this determination with the NWA MP3
Retirement Board.
For of those of us that are too lazy to look it up.
Year
DC Plan Flat
Percentage of
earnings
2008 4.0%
2009 4.5%
2010 6.0%
2011 8.0%
2012 9.0%*
* If the minimum funding requirement under Section 402 of the Pension
Protection Act of 2006 for the NWA Pension Plan for the plan year beginning
October 1, 2011 is less than $15 million, then the DC Plan flat percentage of
earnings will instead be 10% for earnings paid on and after April 1, 2012;
11% for earnings paid on and after July 1, 2012; and 12% for earnings paid on
and after October 1, 2012. If the minimum funding requirement equals or
exceeds $15 million, the DC Plan flat percentage of earnings will be increased
from 9% to 12% effective for earnings paid after December 31, 2012. The
Company’s actuary will determine the funding requirement by December 31,
2011 and the Company will review this determination with the NWA MP3
Retirement Board.
For of those of us that are too lazy to look it up.
06-17-2010 | 01:07 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 602
Likes: 0
From: SLC 767ER Captain
Last time I looked at this issue, I went the full twelve rounds. My recollection was that the DC contribution rates become constant across the pilot group in 2012. There was also an issue with respect to anniversary dates and longevity, and there were a couple hundred pilots losing about $5,000 or so, but on an item that was pretty black and white in the contract. The individuals concerned are near the 12-year rate, and so by the time we could correct the problem in negotiations, noone would be affected.
But then, in the course of those twelve rounds, the senior-vs.-junior debate flared up again. There are a LOT of "dead-zoners" at Delta that believe they are entitled to some serious balance sheet repair when it comes to retirement. They have been pretty benevolent in letting this dog lie, and I think that's an example worth following.
But every once in a while (sigh) we forget this all over again, and we start down this road again. So you said: "...I'm not trying to divide anyone, but rather bring it to other people's attention so that we can ensure it's corrected NLT then the next contract...". And I say: to the best of my knowledge, it is already fixed at the end of the current contract.
But then, in the course of those twelve rounds, the senior-vs.-junior debate flared up again. There are a LOT of "dead-zoners" at Delta that believe they are entitled to some serious balance sheet repair when it comes to retirement. They have been pretty benevolent in letting this dog lie, and I think that's an example worth following.
But every once in a while (sigh) we forget this all over again, and we start down this road again. So you said: "...I'm not trying to divide anyone, but rather bring it to other people's attention so that we can ensure it's corrected NLT then the next contract...". And I say: to the best of my knowledge, it is already fixed at the end of the current contract.
06-17-2010 | 01:09 PM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
Ferd;
I read the whole thing! Why? Because I was more than likely going to have to work under it for no less than half of my FO career.
I understand what you are saying. Like I said Ferd, go run for LAX FO rep!
I read the whole thing! Why? Because I was more than likely going to have to work under it for no less than half of my FO career.
I understand what you are saying. Like I said Ferd, go run for LAX FO rep!
06-17-2010 | 01:13 PM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
Again, of the 07-08 hires who want this fixed who voted for the PWA? I am not trying to be smug, but I know the answer.
Problem is no one read the fine print, and as Ferd states there is some buyers remorse. I agree that a few percentage points in the sunrise of your DAL career is huge for your retirement number. I do not discredit that. My simple point again, is we voted this in. So next time read it, and then make a decision. The easy thing is to read the Highlights but they are just that.
Problem is no one read the fine print, and as Ferd states there is some buyers remorse. I agree that a few percentage points in the sunrise of your DAL career is huge for your retirement number. I do not discredit that. My simple point again, is we voted this in. So next time read it, and then make a decision. The easy thing is to read the Highlights but they are just that.
06-17-2010 | 01:21 PM
On Reserve
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
From: DC9B
I was on probation so I could not vote. I called my rep and voiced my disagreement. His answer was "don't fixate on one item, look at the whole package" I would have voted NO!!!
06-17-2010 | 01:31 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,457
Likes: 0
From: LAX ERA
I vote for Buzz!I can't write, and I have a temper......all the things that made me so loved/successful in a USAF staff job.
But, I do drink beer and tell stupid jokes and stories..........a perfect pilot
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
