Careful, assistant groundskeeper, seats are about to be pulled from your aging whale in order to convert it to lie-flat. You don't want to get less of a payraise, do you?

Oh, what was the per seat payrate of a 747F vs a 747-200 under the NWA CBA? What was the per seat payrate of the 787 versus your 744?

It's not my argument, it's the management guy who works for DPA's argument. I think it's a silly argument.

Hawaiian, however, is an example of how not to get a contract gutted and also proof that the impending doom argument may very well have been a scarecrow. We'll never really know. Maybe I just need some more Lee Moak FACTS to convince me otherwise. :D

I agree that the seat argument is ridiculous, but to nitpick, remember our domestic configured (non-ETOPS as well as ETOPS) 767s also have 264 seats. The ETOPs domestic birds have traditionally been the ones that make the trek out to HI, thus there is a like comparison there. Honestly, I don't know what I'm getting at here other than saying I agree with you, slow.

As far as the 87 hours thing... say what? The higher range time flying guys I ever fly with typically get a bit over 80, with the largest consistent credit guys getting 90. In my FSU educated thick head, that does not bode well for an average of 87.

I had a pair of 110 hour months last year and still only averaged 82.

A guarantee of 75 hours would have had a 3-5 hour bump per month gain on most months. The little things can make big differences.

I believe getting our reserve guarantee to ALV-5 with a floor of 75 should be a priority in our next contract. I would also like to eliminate differences between reserve and regular credit calculations when on a rotation. Those have been a couple of my pet peeves, but I'm just one of 12,000 opinions.

87 hours is the total active pilot pay hour average for 2010. That includes greenslips, training, vacation, credit...anything that is calculated and paid through the hourly rate. When we cut back in 2009 the average was just under 82.

Interestingly, one of the guys whining the loudest about ALPA FPL on the other forum had a heck of a summer last year...195 hours in July alone as a domestic A320 guy. I'd love to get some of that!:D

Disinterested

For any geeks interested, the Nook Color update was released today for manual
Download and will be auto updating next week. Its an upgrade to Android 2.2 with
Flash and a limited app store.

Works on Deltanet - yes, zo far
Works on travelner - yes, but havent tried listing
Works on iCrew - No gets simple accelerator error in the usual places
Works on APC forums - yes

Posted from my Nook Color

Slow,

Totally agree with those two contract items. Have wondered why reserve gets different pay computation for the same rotation. Of course, it might also explain all of those comments on the rotation that said "Reserve Only".

Very well. SWA's 1.53 per seat per hour per captain multiplied by the new 744 seat arrangement of 385 = $589.05 per hour. I know this doesn't matter to you because your main point here was to deflect to a new subject of lie-flat seats and hope nobody noticed.

Yet another deflection from the point of this discussion, which is the fact that Hawaiian has a much better contract, and Southwest has a far superior contract.

I know. Your argument is that Delta is the best...because you learned that in indoc. And ALPA is the best...because you've been told that via talking points. Those beliefs of yesteryear are hurting us today. We need people like you to take the blinders off. We need that very much.

Carl

I don't post here much, but I do keep up with the threads and this latest round of discussion has brought to light an issue that I think the ALPA structure needs to understand. I don't really care if we have the #1 ranked payrate or the #50 ranked payrate. I can look at my paystub every two weeks and figure out that it is not near enough. I can also look at my timecard and figure out that I worked too many days for that money.

I, as well as the people I fly with, are ready to see some MAJOR improvements to our total compensation package, scope and work rules. While I do not want to go as far to say that ALPA will not aggressively fight for restoration, I will say that I am concerned. The official communications from our MEC does not give me confidence. I want my union to state unequivocally that they expect our next contract to compensate us in a way that is comparable to the value of our profession before bankruptcy. I want to know that ALPA thinks that all Delta passengers should be flown by Delta pilots. I want to know that ALPA thinks that some aspects of our scheduling section need solid improvements.

Instead I get an impression that in 2012 ALPA will be content with a slightly revised version of our current agreement with a small pay increase tossed in (much like the JCBA). While this may not be correct, it is the impression that is rampent among the line pilots. If it is not the case, DALPA needs to seriously revise the content and methods of their communications. While I don't think that we need to rise to the level of militant and confrontational tactics with management, the union can say that we expect more--much more. I want the DALPA MEC to state that and I want DALPA MEC to continually state that.

When the next TA is presented to the membership, I will first look at section 1. If it does not show tightened language and improvements--No vote. I will then look at payrates/compenstation. If the package will not result in compensation of SWA/FDX/UPS+ (for an average month, not scenarios that require green/white/yellow slipping, etc.)--No vote. Third I will look at scheduling. Without major improvements--No vote. If the TA passes those three tests I will then look over the other sections and determine if it is acceptable. When the company sits across the table to exchange openers, I want them to know that we have 12,000 pilots that will vote this way and a union that will not present them with anything less.

I hope that AA/UCAL can get the improvements they want, but I do not want them to be a barometer of what we can gain. I want DALPA to respond to OUR needs. If they succeed it will make our fight easier, but it is looking increasingly more likely they both may still be unresolved by the time we open. I want DALPA to have a solid plan to restore our contract independent of what other groups are doing. In addition, if we settle for less we undercut their ability to get substantial gains.

If it sounds like I am afraid, thats because I am. I am afraid that the union I employ to protect my interests will try to sell us a contract for less than I am worth. I am afraid that my union will continue to allow more of our flying to be outsourced. All of this in the name of good relations with the company. There is a fine line the union must balance between "constructive engagement" and old fashioned union screaming and stomping. Right now ALPA seems to have too much engagement and not enough noise being made over issues that are important to us. The pilots feel disenfranchised because we have not seen any major improvements and ALPA seems content to continue down this path. I know someone will point out LOA 19 and the JCBA as improvements and my answer is that is not nearly enough. When our buying power and quality of life is back to where it was a decade ago--that will be enough.

Sorry about the rant, but we as a pilot group need to be sure that the union we hire to represent us measures gains by the assigning an acceptable value to our profession, not merely by our ranking within our peers. Slowplay, I do not mean to single out your post, it just seems that we are becoming focused on the wrong issues. I do value your opinion and am glad that we have people on this board to represent all sides of the issues. Lets figure out how to combine this energy and provide the best results possible for this pilot group.

I have never credited 87 hours in one month post merger. As a reserve, it is almost impossible without rolling thunder. 83 hours is my highest. I have yet to break 70 hours this year. I take that back. I was getting 72:40 waiting for training. I had to take a pay cut now that I'm on the line.

First of all, Ragtop, you need to be posting here more often.

Secondly, you hit the nail squarely on the head for myself and 95% of the guys I fly with. You also, very eloquently, laid out the approach that I too will adapt as we go forward. Your concerns and expectations are exactly mine. This should be the approach of our ALPA. I, too, have concerns that it hasn't been, and won't be. Hopefully, I'm wrong but nothing I've seen to date gives me reason to have confidence.