![]() |
Originally Posted by JABDIP
(Post 932525)
I haven't found any improvements to forget. Seriously, to put it in simple terms, I made less w-2 money in the last 2 years than my last year under fNWA contract averaging the same number of hours of pay per month. Also I am working 36-40 days a year more under DAL work rules for less money. This year I will finally make more than my last fNWA contract year. It goes back to those work rules that Sailing was talking about. I can go on with the things that I had before that I do not have now, but what good would that do. It is always perceived as whinning on here. Hands down with my experince with the DAL contract which is limited, today I would choose the fNWA contract over the current DAL contract. As bad as it was I still think it was much better in QOL issues. I prefer to have rose colored glasses rather than blinders.:rolleyes:
I am open to an education on real improvements. I'm sorry your W2 has declined. I want every DAL pilot's W2 to go up ... way up. But I will not accept pilots being less productive, flying less, or paying people to stay home. Our company simply can not do that and expect to compete. I'd rather we stay lean and mean. |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 932533)
Not quite my point nor the standard context of his statement by the unionoid types.
The block hour argument, while factual, is a standard rebuttal by the union treehouse members to why scope is not _____ (fill in the blank with something minimizing the importance of scope). If you ever want any semblence of that QOL back, we have to regain the rampant outsourcing... otherwise we just don't have the leverage and will never have it. It has to be a twofold process: 1. We have to proactively fight to recaputure scope at every availabe opportunity. 2. We have to continuely apply pressure to make the outsourced venues less cost effective options. Be that the quality of the operation, the ever increasing costs of the aging regionals, the coming FAA FTDT rules, and others... Without recapture, I do not believe we will ever again see the mythical QOL of which you speak. |
Originally Posted by JABDIP
(Post 932537)
I am right there with you on scope, however I do not want to fly 25 outa 30 days to get that flying back. Somewhere there is a delicate balance bewteen QOL and getting flying back. Believe me, I definitely do not like outsourcing or the number of jobs that have been lost to the DCI carriers. I agree with your 2 points.
Neither of my two points require us giving anything up. We've given and given, and there are ways to make it financially viable to nudge/force the company into bringing the flying back. There certainly is a fine line, and I expect APA to find that line. The massive pulldown of RJ's that is occurring is part of an opportunity that is ever widening to recapture. |
Originally Posted by KC10 FATboy
(Post 932535)
JABDIP:
I'm sorry your W2 has declined. I want every DAL pilot's W2 to go up ... way up. But I will not accept pilots being less productive, flying less, or paying people to stay home. Our company simply can not do that and expect to compete. I'd rather we stay lean and mean. I think we are both after the same thing, a lean and mean company that will use me in a productive manner(fly me when I am at work). |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 932451)
The total block hours flown on average in 2001 were the same as the block hours flown in June of 2007 pre merger. You would expect that would yield the same number of pilots. Sadly it did not. We were flying the 07 schedule with 2500 fewer line pilots. Down from 10,000 to 7500. That was a direct result of a hundred or more work rule changes to increase productivity. Those jobs lost are equally spread across the fleet spectrum from 777 CA to MD88 FO.
How many flight engineers did we have back then? When I was hired we had a ton of 727's, and some L-10's. I agree with your point about work rules causing massive job losses - they did, but totally disagree with your implication that job losses due to work rules dwarfs job losses due to outsourcing. Both have been bad for us. I also disagree that we lost 777 jobs - since we now have more 777s and consequently more 777 pilots today. Yes, we would have more 777 Pilots with better work rules but it is not totally correct to say we lost 777 jobs. How many less 777 pilots would we have now if we outsourced wide-body flying like UAL is attempting to do? Job losses for any reason are bad for us as Pilots, but beyond our Pilot contract job losses through work rules are limited by FARs. The work rule caused job losses have been extensive - we agree here, but I feel they are basically behind us - I can only hope job losses due to outsourcing are also behind us. Scoop |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 932540)
Neither of my two points require us giving anything up. We've given and given, and there are ways to make it financially viable to nudge/force the company into bringing the flying back. There certainly is a fine line, and I expect APA to find that line.
The massive pulldown of RJ's that is occurring is part of an opportunity that is ever widening to recapture. |
Originally Posted by JABDIP
(Post 932541)
I would have to say you are a long way from lean and mean compared to the lean and mean at NWA. Most of us(fNWA) are appauled at the way DAL throws money around. I flew more hours per day and did not have productivity sits in hotels around the world costing the company more money for extra rooms and perdieum that they do not need to spend. From what I have seen, just my opinion, NWA ran a more cost effective operation much of that coming from much better IT. The recent snow events in ATL and JFK/LGA attest to this, but after all if it was one thing we did know how to do was operate in a snow environment. I will give you that the 3 hour rule has complicated things and ATL has very limited snow/deice capability. Believe me there is room for major improvements here. What would you like to do work 12 days for 75 hours or 18 days for 75 hours. I want to go to work ,fly my tail off ,and then go home. It's call max pay for min time at work(resulting in less days away from home). If they want to sit my butt in a hotel room for 2 or 3 days not flying it needs to cost them dearly.:)
I think we are both after the same thing, a lean and mean company that will use me in a productive manner(fly me when I am at work). I spent the last two major snowstorms in the north with double layovers (twice) in MSP. I'm well aware of the North's de-icing/anti-icing capability. It took us 1.5 - 2 hours hours to de-ice/anti-ice and that was with the schedule gutted. You're never going to see a thousand flights or more being de-iced/anti-iced in Atlanta. There simply isn't enough money, man power, space, trucks, or de-icing fluid to do that. As Anderson said this morning, when the big storms come rolling through, it is best to just clear the schedule, reset your planes and people, and try it again the next day. There's no need to kill someone trying to fly in that crap. |
Originally Posted by Scoop
(Post 932550)
How many flight engineers did we have back then? When I was hired we had a ton of 727's, and some L-10's.
I agree with your point about work rules causing massive job losses - they did, but totally disagree with your implication that job losses due to work rules dwarfs job losses due to outsourcing. Both have been bad for us. I also disagree that we lost 777 jobs - since we now have more 777s and consequently more 777 pilots today. Yes, we would have more 777 Pilots with better work rules but it is not totally correct to say we lost 777 jobs. How many less 777 pilots would we have now if we outsourced wide-body flying like UAL is attempting to do? Job losses for any reason are bad for us as Pilots, but beyond our Pilot contract job losses through work rules are limited by FARs. The work rule caused job losses have been extensive - we agree here, but I feel they are basically behind us - I can only hope job losses due to outsourcing are also behind us. Scoop |
Well they are pulling a lot of Comair stuff out and i don't think they are replacing it right now. Good for the career, unless said career was at Comair
|
Originally Posted by KC10 FATboy
(Post 932554)
In two earlier posts you were complaining about "lost jobs". And that is what I addressed. We are in agreement. I hate the productivity sits, 30+ layovers. The IT isn't anywhere close to where it needs to be But I have faith in the company. They've paid $2B in debt this year, and put $1B in improvements and upgrading the product, and we're getting profit sharing.
Spent the last two major snowstorms in the north with double layovers (twice) in MSP. I'm well aware of the North's de-icing/anti-icing capability. It took us 1.5 - 2 hours hours to de-ice/anti-ice and that was with the schedule gutted. You're never going to see a thousand flights or more being de-iced/anti-iced in Atlanta. There simply isn't enough money, man power, space, trucks, or de-icing fluid to do that. As Anderson said this morning, when the big storms come rolling through, it is best to just clear the schedule, reset your planes and people, and try it again the next day. There's no need to kill someone trying to fly in that crap. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:49 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands