Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,990
Talked to my rep. He thinks this meeting could get ugly depending on the reasoning the vote for neg committee members was called for. He and 13 other reps thinks the timing is bad, especially because dalpa asked for early openers. In his view that means we are too close to section six if not already there. Thus the special meeting so as to give the leaders direction, instead of a conference call vote.
If the NC swap is made quickly, without folks running for office, it will be an interesting dot to connect. Also have to put a watch on ERJ, PNW, SKYW & RJET stock. TSA is privately held. The fact they got Compass puts them in the game.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 07-09-2011 at 01:47 PM.
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
FWIW, I spoke to two reps in two different bases, and they both said NO to scope sales.
Nu
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: 7ERA
Posts: 1,216
But what really bothers me is if you have one pay scale for captains and on for FOs then someone is going to get a pay cut. Whatever we do with the pay scale, it will have to be cost neutral vs the current pay scale. I see no way to pay everyone on the same scale without the top guys taking a paycut. Even assuming we were going to get large pay raises, then the guys at the top would get nothing while everyone else had their pay brought up to the top rate.
There are a lot of senior widebody FOs who have not bid narrowbody captain. The hit to their lifestyle was not worth the small pay raise. But if every captain seat paid the same as a 777 seat, then you can bet your ass a large number of them will want a captain seat....any captain seat. If you get to one pay rate do you rebid the whole airline? How much will that cost the company?
From a scope standpoint, if you support a single pay scale you may as well sell out the 100 seaters. There is no way the company will invest in a 100 seat aircraft when they have to pay the pilots the same as a 777 pilot.
Getting away from different rates per aircraft sounds great in theory, but in practice it can never happen at an airline like Delta. Too many obstacles.
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,990
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,522
I'm not saying a workable solution isn't possible, but I'm just not seeing one at the moment. Even if we had a dynamic rate that flexed for everyone proportionately to how much of each fleet type was pressed into service, that wouldn't do anything to fix that flaw in the system and would actually once again push the majority of the group very hard to outsource the bottom end so as to not effect the top pay downward. The only incentive would be that small percentage of very senior FO's and very junior Captains in the "habitable zone" of potential upgrades/downgrades in the near future with a small movement either way, and thats not enough. The company would then have significant pressure to keep the size of aircraft as big as possible and even more incentive to outsource more. UPS uses longevity pay and while their rates are good they don't fly anything under a 757. That would be very bad for us if we went that route, even with their payrates and retirement.
So for a LBP system to work, it would have to incentivise smaller aircraft (the much fatter part of the bottom of the pyramid rather than the top) and I'm not seeing how it would do that. If that could be addressed I would be in favor of it.
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
If it was a simply mater of rubber stamping the current Merger committee makeup, this could be done on a conference call in all of 3 minutes.
would you and ACL be down with that?
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,522
I do not want a longevity based pay system. I want a pay system that does away with longevity altogether at the company. Our 12 year pay scale should be the only pay scale we have. A year 1 MD-88 first officer should make the same as a year 12 MD-88 first officer. After all, an MD-88 first officer is an MD-88 first officer doing the exact same job. Why are two pilots doing the exact same job making different amounts of money? If all airlines did this, we would be able to start at the bottom of another carrier thus putting more pressure on management. It would give us less fear of our company going out of business. Seniority would let you bid up to bigger equipment to make more money. Of course the entire pay scale would need an inflation based raise every year. I've brought this up to a few line pilots. Everyone I've told tells me it's a horrible idea. We should be rewarded for time with a company. I agree with that, but the reward should be everything we currently get with seniority.
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,522
Additionally, even if it were enforceable, ALPA would have to have significant other minimum standards. What good is a high pay rate if you have zero rigs, zero min days off, no monthly guarantee, no block or better, no retirement contribution, fly to the FAR's only, no work rules and no vacation, no per diem and no hotels on the overnights?
You would need a minimum contract standard and every single item would need to be fairly strong. You would also need it to be enforceable enough that the occasional carrier may have to liquidate ratner than go one penny below it. That is the challenge.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post