Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
07-07-2011 | 04:01 PM
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 829
Likes: 10
From: metal tube operator
Buck et al., thank you for the discussion about C2K. Most of us at the bottom of the seniority list aren't around when C2K was negotiated. It obviously seemed to me that there were flaws in C2K, and the apex economic condition that was on the edge of downturn proved fatal to a company that made lots of money, but also spent even more money.
It seems to me the "old" DALPA made the most out of it (sans scope) during that negotiation, and the "new" DALPA is trying to be more prudent, telling us that "We know more than you know, but we can't tell you, so just trust us in leading the way". Either way is not what I want.
History is doomed to repeat itself if we don't learn from it.
It seems to me the "old" DALPA made the most out of it (sans scope) during that negotiation, and the "new" DALPA is trying to be more prudent, telling us that "We know more than you know, but we can't tell you, so just trust us in leading the way". Either way is not what I want.
History is doomed to repeat itself if we don't learn from it.
07-07-2011 | 05:01 PM
Works Every Weekend
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,506
Likes: 0
From: 737 ATL
Bucking Bar, I agree with almost everything you said, EXCEPT the DALPA inner circle. It was a wholesale turnover when JM left and LM took over. One viewed the world through rose colored glasses and landed us in BK; the other viewed the world as it exists and made the most of it. JMO. And I lost my pension to prove it.
All these years I thought it was bad management, terrorism and the economy.
Its a good thing we have more sophisticated union leadership now. There's always a danger of pilots making too much money again. We desperately need Moak and his team to "view the world as it exists" and keep us from negotiating any more of those excessive pay rates.
07-07-2011 | 05:07 PM
Da Hudge
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
So it was John Malone and over-paid pilots that landed us in bankruptcy?
All these years I thought it was bad management, terrorism and the economy.
Its a good thing we have more sophisticated union leadership now. There's always a danger of pilots making too much money again. We desperately need Moak and his team to "view the world as it exists" and keep us from negotiating any more of those excessive pay rates.
All these years I thought it was bad management, terrorism and the economy.
Its a good thing we have more sophisticated union leadership now. There's always a danger of pilots making too much money again. We desperately need Moak and his team to "view the world as it exists" and keep us from negotiating any more of those excessive pay rates.
07-07-2011 | 05:07 PM
Da Hudge
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
07-07-2011 | 05:16 PM
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
I am on the side of making sure we get the largest raises possible and the highest possible quality of life for me and my family while also taking care of the junior pilots. If we could by magic get the NMB to release us at the amendable date we could force the company into a contract that would be the envy of every pilot in the world. It would be great for me. I suspect the bottom quarter of the seniority list would not like it much when the airline could no long compete to add flying and starting losing it rapidly.
Most pilots posting here are clueless about the contract process and what is involved. One of the things is costing. You have to use accurate numbers or you lose credibility. That will be critical with the NMB.
You can't use a SW number of average hours they fly and then use a Delta number based on 75 hours per month. You have to use the Delta average. Its over 1100 hours a month much like at SW. On the 737 that puts the Average Delta CA around 194k a year plus another 9K more then a SW guy gets in the DC plan. or over 200K. Still that a lot less then SW but not quite what is posted here.
There is a valid argument that the MD88 should be compared with SW. That is however debatable. The company will quickly point out that they agreed to the higher pay rates on the 737NG based on how efficient the airframe was and the extra profit it would generate. That was our position during the 3b6 process on the airframe. Now we are going to reverse that position and base it on seats. That may or may not fly with the NMB.
The bottom line is you can talk all day about SW. They have never generated anything industry leading. I don't really care about SW. I care about Delta and our future contract. I expect to see us get back to our historical quality of life advantage and pay advantage. Trying to make direct comparisons with flawed data is not the right way to start out negotiations.
Most pilots posting here are clueless about the contract process and what is involved. One of the things is costing. You have to use accurate numbers or you lose credibility. That will be critical with the NMB.
You can't use a SW number of average hours they fly and then use a Delta number based on 75 hours per month. You have to use the Delta average. Its over 1100 hours a month much like at SW. On the 737 that puts the Average Delta CA around 194k a year plus another 9K more then a SW guy gets in the DC plan. or over 200K. Still that a lot less then SW but not quite what is posted here.
There is a valid argument that the MD88 should be compared with SW. That is however debatable. The company will quickly point out that they agreed to the higher pay rates on the 737NG based on how efficient the airframe was and the extra profit it would generate. That was our position during the 3b6 process on the airframe. Now we are going to reverse that position and base it on seats. That may or may not fly with the NMB.
The bottom line is you can talk all day about SW. They have never generated anything industry leading. I don't really care about SW. I care about Delta and our future contract. I expect to see us get back to our historical quality of life advantage and pay advantage. Trying to make direct comparisons with flawed data is not the right way to start out negotiations.
Carl
07-07-2011 | 05:27 PM
Works Every Weekend
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,506
Likes: 0
From: 737 ATL
Their influence and control over the apparatus is nearly total at the moment.
Like it or not, we're going into Contract 2012 under their stewardship.
I'm clearly a skeptic but I sincerely hope this whole new age approach to labor management relations works out because this first post-bankruptcy contract is going to define the careers of most of the seniority list.
07-07-2011 | 05:34 PM
veut gagner ŕ la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
The man does have a lot of loyal disciples. You gotta give him that.
Their influence and control over the apparatus is nearly total at the moment.
Like it or not, we're going into Contract 2012 under their stewardship.
I'm clearly a skeptic but I sincerely hope this whole new age approach to labor management relations works out because this first post-bankruptcy contract is going to define the careers of most of the seniority list.
Their influence and control over the apparatus is nearly total at the moment.
Like it or not, we're going into Contract 2012 under their stewardship.
I'm clearly a skeptic but I sincerely hope this whole new age approach to labor management relations works out because this first post-bankruptcy contract is going to define the careers of most of the seniority list.
RJ's are not good for Delta and they're not good for us and they're not good for DALPA. They're only good if you're running for President of ALPA.
See the kid flying the ASA jet and saying good bye to all of the passengers with a I LOVE SWA lanyard as one example.
Last edited by forgot to bid; 07-07-2011 at 07:10 PM. Reason: noticed I used there instead of they're, thank goodness when someone quotes your post you finally see all of its faults.
07-07-2011 | 05:35 PM
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
I'm not so sure, Carl. History says otherwise.
ALPA keeps giving away scope and selling it with enhanced furlough protection.
Remember Moak's grievance settlement that allowed the extra 76 seat jets?
That was a straight up deal to give the company another 26 large RJs in exchange for more no furlough language. It was just 2 years ago.
Here's the settlement, lest we forget:
• The Company will agree to the Association’s interpretation of Section 1 B. 40. d. and e. but (ALPA) provides a one-time exception to this interpretation allowing the Company to operate up to 153* 76-seat jets so long as the Company does not furlough any pilot on the integrated system seniority list as of February 9, 2009, the date the agreement was signed.
...
• If the Company does furlough any pilot on the Integrated System Seniority List, then the Company will physically remove six passenger seats from the number of 76-seat jets (in service, undergoing maintenance and operational spares) that exceeds the authorized number of 76-seat jets under the Association’s interpretation of Section 1 B. 40. d. and e.
The company knew there wasn't going to be any furloughs. So what's the bottom line? They got their 26 extra DCI jets and what did we get? Another no furlough clause.
ALPA keeps giving away scope and selling it with enhanced furlough protection.
Remember Moak's grievance settlement that allowed the extra 76 seat jets?
That was a straight up deal to give the company another 26 large RJs in exchange for more no furlough language. It was just 2 years ago.
Here's the settlement, lest we forget:
• The Company will agree to the Association’s interpretation of Section 1 B. 40. d. and e. but (ALPA) provides a one-time exception to this interpretation allowing the Company to operate up to 153* 76-seat jets so long as the Company does not furlough any pilot on the integrated system seniority list as of February 9, 2009, the date the agreement was signed.
...
• If the Company does furlough any pilot on the Integrated System Seniority List, then the Company will physically remove six passenger seats from the number of 76-seat jets (in service, undergoing maintenance and operational spares) that exceeds the authorized number of 76-seat jets under the Association’s interpretation of Section 1 B. 40. d. and e.
The company knew there wasn't going to be any furloughs. So what's the bottom line? They got their 26 extra DCI jets and what did we get? Another no furlough clause.
The HUGE difference in your example is that the pilots didn't ratify this. The MEC just did it on their own with none of our input. That won't happen in a Section 6. The upper, middle and lower end of the seniority list will not approve scope sales anymore for the traditional reasons of fear, fear, and no furlough clause "protection" respectively.
Carl
07-07-2011 | 05:54 PM
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
Just flew with a mid-seniority guy and we started about our upcoming contract. He stated that DALPA negotiated C2K and even though the company couldn't afford it, Leo signed it anyway, and basically bankrupt the company overnight. I wasn't at DL in 2000, so if anyone would chime in, i'd appreciate. But it seems to me there's more than a few of those that think that way. If that's the case, we're in big trouble.
Incredible. We've got to be better defenders of actual history, as opposed to parroting management talking points of why most airlines went bankrupt.
Carl
07-07-2011 | 06:01 PM
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
DALPA knew how this would end up when they agreed to the scope language in the first place. Now they refuse to enforce that very language.
Carl
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
