Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
07-09-2011 | 08:19 AM
On Reserve
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,886
Likes: 0
From: MSP7ERB
07-09-2011 | 08:33 AM
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
It could be better if we rationalize our pay scales to reflect this fact. Since the really heavy heavy super uber premium metal is going to JV partners, why don't rationalize this? Like I have been saying.. the super premium fleet isn't going to go great guns here at DAL... acknowledge this and get more money for more pilots...
07-09-2011 | 08:35 AM
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
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.
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.
Now THAT's what I have been talking about!!!!!!!!1
07-09-2011 | 08:39 AM
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
duplicated... lo siento
Last edited by tsquare; 07-09-2011 at 08:54 AM.
07-09-2011 | 08:40 AM
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
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.
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.
07-09-2011 | 08:44 AM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
07-09-2011 | 08:51 AM
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
STOP. No it wouldn't. They would all be paid at the SAME rate -- Everyone can't be "above average". Meaning those currently at the highest rates subsidize those currently at the lowest rates as we transition. It also removes the "pay or QOL?" decision and turns it into just QOL. Great for the senior guys; but the end result is there will be no more junior categories as at present, meaning it will be many, many years before those clamoring the loudest for LBP will ever hold weekends or holidays off. As with all things - be careful what you wish for.
Nope... YOU are wrong PG... I know that is almost... no.. it is impossible for you to believe, but you are totally unequivocally wrong. You are simply scared of what is unknown to you.
07-09-2011 | 09:05 AM
seeing the country...
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,015
Likes: 41
From: 73N A
Anyone else catch this tidbit in the Council 20 update from yesterday?
Unable To Commute Policy
In a letter dated February 17, 2011, Captain Jim Graham explained the Unable to Commute Policy. This letter is available on the Flight Operations website under Pilot Tools. Recently, Flight Operations has been sending letters to pilots following an unable to commute event. We were briefed at the May MEC meeting on these changes. These changes include counseling and possible removal from the program for pilots who have excessive usage over a certain period of time. Providing specifics of the policy and enforcement rests with Flight Operations.
Unable To Commute Policy
In a letter dated February 17, 2011, Captain Jim Graham explained the Unable to Commute Policy. This letter is available on the Flight Operations website under Pilot Tools. Recently, Flight Operations has been sending letters to pilots following an unable to commute event. We were briefed at the May MEC meeting on these changes. These changes include counseling and possible removal from the program for pilots who have excessive usage over a certain period of time. Providing specifics of the policy and enforcement rests with Flight Operations.
07-09-2011 | 09:11 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
Anyone else catch this tidbit in the Council 20 update from yesterday?
Unable To Commute Policy
In a letter dated February 17, 2011, Captain Jim Graham explained the Unable to Commute Policy. This letter is available on the Flight Operations website under Pilot Tools. Recently, Flight Operations has been sending letters to pilots following an unable to commute event. We were briefed at the May MEC meeting on these changes. These changes include counseling and possible removal from the program for pilots who have excessive usage over a certain period of time. Providing specifics of the policy and enforcement rests with Flight Operations.
Unable To Commute Policy
In a letter dated February 17, 2011, Captain Jim Graham explained the Unable to Commute Policy. This letter is available on the Flight Operations website under Pilot Tools. Recently, Flight Operations has been sending letters to pilots following an unable to commute event. We were briefed at the May MEC meeting on these changes. These changes include counseling and possible removal from the program for pilots who have excessive usage over a certain period of time. Providing specifics of the policy and enforcement rests with Flight Operations.
I'm pretty sure that is a direct quote from the original letter.
07-09-2011 | 09:12 AM
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
Slow, there is not "my." As for scope sales, your are correct, the group will decide. It would be better for the Union to just take a position that scope is not for sale, but we both know that will not happen. With that statement absent from the leadership, pilots start to wonder. We also know that if a minor concession comes about, the group will be looking the shinny ball attached.
Carl
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
