Airline Pilot Central Forums - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)

- - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/36912-any-latest-greatest-about-delta.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 1020294)

I wasn't aware of that either.

Is this related to the Delta RFP announcement?

( ) NO, absolutely not, I'd put my web board credibility on it & you're a nut job
( ) Don't Know
( ) Can't say

No response will be counted as "that's NDA stuff ... jerk"

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 1020187)

T,

I have an open mind with LBP. What I want to know is: Why is he wrong? Convince me!!!

Denny

I do too. My main concern over it is the risk that it would favor growth for larger planes while also favoring fewer smaller planes. Once the pay is the same, sure go ahead and give us a few A380s and give tons of 767/777/787/350s to JV partners. And forget about ever recapturing scope. As hard as that would be anyway (100% possible, realistic and worth it, but hard nonetheless) it would be even harder to try and bring 76 seaters back to mainline...or even the next gen 100 seater...at 747/380 pay.

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NuGuy (Post 1020245)

If it was a simply mater of rubber stamping the current NC makeup, this could be done on a conference call in all of 3 minutes.

If I changed your post to read

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?:D

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44 (Post 1020249)

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.

If everyone did that we would accomplish most of the good parts of a NSL with none of the bad parts. Liquidation wouldn't be much of a threat if pilots knew that if their airline collapsed the other airlines would grow like crazy filling the void and the pilots at the fallen carrier could all go make 12 year (SWA FO or greater) pay. Add in a national hiring list and you have all the benefits of a NSL and none of the drawbacks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44 (Post 1020274)

I want to bump my own post. While I'm at it, why can't ALPA should set minimum hourly rates that no airline can negotiate under.

What if they did and one pilot group wanted to "deal an ace" to management to undercut other groups. What is the penalty? Thrown out of ALPA? OK, but they still get all the work. It would have to be enforceable.

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 1020317)

That is actually pretty funny. Why not combine the two with the grievance committee, have one member and call him Lee.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jabberwock (Post 1020322)

That is actually pretty funny.

Dude, your avatar is....well, at least he's gone.:eek:

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 1020317)

This issue was addressed by the MEC and was subject to numerous resolutions.

I seriously doubt any revisiting of the subject would be materially affected if it was done via a conference call or a Special MEC meeting.

Nu

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xray678 (Post 1020300)

I think PG is probably right about the affect on the seniority list. The choice of staying senior on smaller equipment or being junior on larger equipment would likely be gone. No matter what, there will be some unintended consequences.

How do you figure. Those seats that the senior guys freed up aren't gonna disappear. You want to fly 747s before you turn 64? This might be your chance because they exist only in a very small number, and only in a base that is 85% commuters. LBP isn't gonna make a junior guy senior, but it will give him more options.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xray678 (Post 1020300)

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?

Again, how do you figure? The seat doesn't pay the same, it is your time with the company that makes any seat pay more. IF you have been here 12 years, your captain seat will pay 12 year pay regardles of which airplane it is. There are a myriad reasons why FOs aren't bidding captain seats right now. I'll betcha that the biggest reason is because of the suckery of our reserve system thank you very much...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xray678 (Post 1020300)

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.

They might be paying more for a pilot sitting in the left seat of an RJ, but they might be paying less for a guy sitting in the left seat of a 777. It all balances. I don't think there is gonna be a rush by the 777 guys to jump on the MadDog if this happened... maybe one or two.. but probably not that many... The exalted one.. PG gave me a pass... :rolleyes: His glass is half empty.. mine is half full. His argument is no more "logical" than mine. Actually, his is less so, because his is totally focused on an emotional response by the pilot group. He doesn't like the pilot group having to only look at lifestyle as a choice. He thinks there should be pain involved in every decision that a pilot makes. THAT is why he's wrong. /rant... Anyway, more pilots will make more money instead of the old and senior few. The end game is retirement, and that is where our pay rates should be focused. Time/value of money. Read a couple of books about Warren Buffet. The magic of compounding.. He didn't get where he is by stealing money on Wall Street.. or waiting until he turned 80... slow and steady won his race.... You young guys will get the message when you turn 45 or 50... until then... better save those acorns, cause the union ain't doing you any favors.

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 1020326)

Dude, your avatar is....well, at least he's gone.:eek:

He's still on the board, isn't he?