To a point. Let me explain:

Just to add to the discussion and not to indicate my position:

If we had a longevity only based pay system it would be a huge win. It would mean that all of our A's would be paid at the highest rate, and with more block hrs, all Capt's would have the ability to hit the highest paying position. With our current system of pay, and AF flying the biggest metal, they save money with their longevity based pay and save money with our pay by longevity and type. Those jets on our property would allow more "Super Premium" paying positions, where now we have more 7ER slots that pay better than most, but in reality only pay marginally better than a 73N. I would like to see the comparison pay wise if we went to longevity based system, and assuming near top end pay for a Capt's versus what we have now.

Capt's will agree, they would care less about AF flying the 380 and 777's all over the world if they were all topped out on pay.

Just a point to ponder.

Job wise more block hrs are good for us, but when they stagnate pilots, or top them out on lower paying jets, I would call it a draw for those most effected.

 

Seems hard to believe that they are in compliance with adding so much capacity and no indications of pulling it back while we will be cutting capacity substantially in short order. My point was that the way the JV is written it allows a very large ability to flex with no real hurry to get the balance back in compliance.

Yes our flying aircraft with fewer seats does require us to fly more metal and therefore more pilot jobs albeit in somewhat lower paying positions. Maybe that will all change when the ownership rules change and we all go to work for AF.

 

The compliance limits are "Trade Secret" but yes, there is a good flux, and even when they go out of it, there is a corrective period. Even if they are out of the allowable limits, they are in the corrective period and can easily be back in with next summers schedule load. We may not like that, but the fact is that, as written they are in compliance. Because of the level of the draw down, we got a route or two from AF. That was to keep it with in the corrective limits.

I am not sure you will be able to tighten it up. The only way you will have a chance to amend it is if/when Virgin Atlantic is added, and that will take the balance well below 50-50 due to the metal they fly.

 

POS 96 was sold to the pilots with the promise of "unprecedented growth".
Nothing in writing. Just a promise.
ALPA and management pushed hard to get it ratified and it sailed through.

Don't underestimate the persuasive power of the company combined with the ALPA insiders if they decide to work together. They can get damn near anything passed via memrat.

Hopefully enough union guys have realized the truth about outsourcing and their views have "evolved", but --

If the union operatives and mgmt decide they want a scope sale, we're gonna get a scope sale.
And the membership will ratify it.

 

I believe your analysis to be flawed. AF isn't our competition for flying. That was removed from the equation in the JV. The other two alliances and other airlines are our competition.

CMR and ASA have very similar payrates. All of CMR A's are at or near the highest rate, while many of ASA A's are not. CMR's pilot costs (and total labor costs across all work groups) are much higher than ASA's because of their comparitive longevity. So instead of growing like ASA, CMR shrank.

Unless flying at an airline with a unique fleet or training footprint (i.e. all 737, all Airbus), there is no truth to the "lower training costs" associated with LBP. Unless they are rostered by their company (which I really don't want), it only inverts the training pyramid as pilots get senior enough to hold desirable flying.

From a pilot perspective, LPB takes two factors in career decision (pay vs QOL) and converts them to one. That's great for the uber senior...not so much for the junior.

fwiw.

 

How did you feel about that POS C2K? I think it was a pretty good contract, yet over 20% voted against it.

 

POS96 was what got me off my duff. What's it going to take you and Lumberg to get off yours?

btw, we recalled the 400+ remaining furloughess and hired 3100 pilots in the 5 years after signing that contract. Not unprecedented growth, but pretty substantial. Our company also made record profits (see the contract history) during that period.

 

Some say the competition may have been removed, but the pulldowns effect both sizes but are not equal. Growth and downsizing effect our block hrs more. Truth. We do not "compete" as you state for flying in the JV as it is metal neutral with a "production balance," but we do compete for gauge of aircraft, and due to the Import-Export bank advantage they have, they will get what Delta pilots see as the highest paying positions due to economic advantages. It is also advantageous for the JV as a whole to have them fly the bigger jets. It equates to less positions at AF where they get more in a Gross W-2 then we do, and as a result we have more positions at a lower pay than they would be over there. The reason ESK's work for the companies is clear. They kept jobs here, but eliminated the potential for the largest jets to arrive here at DAL em masse.

On the LBP I am not going to argue that it helps the senior more than the junior, but the junior are looking at it with a keen eye due to the asinine stagnation that they have seen over the last decade. Most are QOL driven and have no desire to do certian flying, and as a result want the pay of WB flying on lower jets. I was actually really surprised to see how many Reps and ALPA guys in general were open to this idea.

I do not know if it is a deal good enough to embark on, but given how the AF JV will work out, the benefit is that we would create more positions at the highest pay. That goes for left and right seats.

 

Growth is good, but what our pilots see is two cycles that are out of sync. Many fear we will be repeating POS 96 with limiting our expectations. All of the analysis are predicting that DAL is ready to soar, and frankly with good cause.

 

Just to keep the whole discussion factual the Company has not offered any raises for scope relaxation since the 1113 contract came into force. They did not mention or ask for it in the joint contract. They have not mentioned or asked for it since the joint contract. Dalpa and the company have had no talks on the subject. The entire concept is a mythical creation of this and other forums.