Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
09-17-2010, 09:57 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Originally Posted by sailingfun
The fact is that all pilots at Delta made a lot less money in 09. In my case 30,000 dollars less. This was because of the crash in air travel in 09. Everyone had greatly reduced flight hours. It will not be the case in 10. When the Joint contract was being negotiated they looked at total credit hours for both pilot groups on average. The DAL contract ended up with more credit hours per pilot however they were very close. The payrates were however higher.
This summer many former NWA pilots are seeing one of their best years ever for pay. One 747 Captain had 218 hours pay for July. The other Captain on the same flight had 186. My pay is going to be above 08 levels or almost 35,000 more then 09 this year. Most pilots are going to see large increases from 09.
This summer many former NWA pilots are seeing one of their best years ever for pay. One 747 Captain had 218 hours pay for July. The other Captain on the same flight had 186. My pay is going to be above 08 levels or almost 35,000 more then 09 this year. Most pilots are going to see large increases from 09.
Somebody had a wedding to pay for! CARL?!
Carl, 80 wants a beer, and Ferd, and Sailing, Tsquare, and Slow... and 1234, and ACL and I would like Cokes, and Super, Leine, buzz, especially Alfa, capncrunch, hockey, Sink, Ferd, Check, Ferd, New, formerdal, mem9, ferd, another coke for me, pineapple, gunfighter, bigguns, Nu, KC10, pineapple, wuzzo-french for bird, fly2002, carl, ferd, carl?, jabdip, gloopy, ferd, ... i've gone back enough pages looking for names, sorry if I left anyone out but I my brain power is on ALT TO right now.
09-17-2010, 10:30 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,324
Originally Posted by Sink r8
That's weird, because the fNWA pilots I fly with claim to be happy with their overall situation, even if they have issues with certain aspects of the contract, and the SLI. For sure, we have discussions about procedures, nostalgia for the way things were, etc. We also have discussions about the things they don't miss, and that's a substantial list as well.
The more I fly with them, the more I find that (surprise, surprise) we're not all that different. They also strike me as pretty smart people. Too smart for 87% to have voted for an inferior product.
The more I fly with them, the more I find that (surprise, surprise) we're not all that different. They also strike me as pretty smart people. Too smart for 87% to have voted for an inferior product.
DALS voted for the contract and set sail. We were left standing at the dock with one option, catch the last dingy to the boat. I think it is a wide stretch to state that because we voted for it, it must be superior.
09-17-2010, 10:39 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,273
Originally Posted by capncrunch
I did not say the pilots were unhappy, just stating facts.
DALS voted for the contract and set sail. We were left standing at the dock with one option, catch the last dingy to the boat. I think it is a wide stretch to state that because we voted for it, it must be superior.
DALS voted for the contract and set sail. We were left standing at the dock with one option, catch the last dingy to the boat. I think it is a wide stretch to state that because we voted for it, it must be superior.
Funny, I thought the former NW pilots voted for the contract with a 80 percent plus yes vote. I think the yes vote for former Delta pilots was only about 60 percent yes.
09-17-2010, 10:52 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Originally Posted by capncrunch
I did not say the pilots were unhappy, just stating facts.
DALS voted for the contract and set sail. We were left standing at the dock with one option, catch the last dingy to the boat. I think it is a wide stretch to state that because we voted for it, it must be superior.
DALS voted for the contract and set sail. We were left standing at the dock with one option, catch the last dingy to the boat. I think it is a wide stretch to state that because we voted for it, it must be superior.
"...You are incorrect and I'll tell you why. Although FNWA took a raise in hourly pay, we took a hit in work rules which actually equated to a pay cut. Every FNWA pilot I've flown with is making less now than with our previous contract. That is a fact not spin..."
DALs voted our conscience because you couldn't make up your minds, and we couldn't get to an agreement. I'm not going to apologize for that. We were pretty sick of you guys saying you might be for it, but not really, but maybe you were, and it would really be a shame if we didn't make it happen, but you were on vacation and stuff...
Interestingly, my recollection seems to be that we actually voted on the final JCBA after you, but I don't want to relive that little slice of history. Regardless, I can't believe your guys would have been stupid enough, or so poorly led, that they would have voted for a contract that represented a paycut to the tune of 87%.
At any rate, how do you propose backing up your assertion that it is indeed a fact, not spin, that every fNWA pilot you have flown with has taken a paycut with the new JCBA? The "BS" flag has just been raised.
09-17-2010, 11:01 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Guys, one of the tenant TOS rules is not to out or try to out a person's identity on these boards. I have gone back and cleaned up all of the assumptions and posts linking a ANONYMOUS screen name to a proper person. Whether or not one is correct does not matter. It is not allowed. It is a really bad precedent to set.
Consider this a group reminder!
Consider this a group reminder!
09-17-2010, 11:06 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Fine. I think you left one of mine... I deleted it.
09-17-2010, 11:11 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
I was still going back and cleaning them up, but thanks.
09-17-2010, 11:17 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Just a question to the group...do we really have to go down this road yet again?
Instead of focusing on the past, why don't some of you start looking ahead? Our company just gave an investor update that was pretty positive. The quarter's projected margin is 12-13%, which would provide an annualized 7%-8% if the 4th quarter is flat. They're talking about $260 million in profit sharing. Has anybody else put together that profitable companies in this industry pay better than unprofitable ones?
If you want restoration, profits are the quickest way to get there, imo.
Or we can keep carping back to who had what when and whine...
Instead of focusing on the past, why don't some of you start looking ahead? Our company just gave an investor update that was pretty positive. The quarter's projected margin is 12-13%, which would provide an annualized 7%-8% if the 4th quarter is flat. They're talking about $260 million in profit sharing. Has anybody else put together that profitable companies in this industry pay better than unprofitable ones?
If you want restoration, profits are the quickest way to get there, imo.Or we can keep carping back to who had what when and whine...
09-17-2010, 11:20 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Slow I agree 100%. We need to look at the past, reference it and move forward. We do not want to repeat past mistakes, but we should not live there either. It is time to move on an act as one unified group.
The PWA is the PWA, the list of wants is long, so lets start looking at how to do it, and stop placing blame.
The PWA is the PWA, the list of wants is long, so lets start looking at how to do it, and stop placing blame.
09-17-2010, 11:23 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Originally Posted by slowplay
Just a question to the group...do we really have to go down this road yet again?
I see you're also struggling with that decision.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
