$186.06 is their rate. I used that number instead of the "converted from trip pay" number because I was talking about their work rules, which use the "trips for pay" concept. In other words, if we were to adopt their work rules (including TFP), we would get an immediate 30% increase in pay without even changing our current pay rates. Make sense now?

I am all for restoration.
My point was simply that the "opener" can't be judged so easily just based on the size of the pay bump we demand. As sailingfun mentioned, a number that is ridiculously high is just a waste of ink.

I hear you and I'm with you all the way on what it will take to get us back near C2K.
I just don't understand why people think they are going to be able to arrive at some momentous conclusions about ALPA based on the pay rate that is in this opener.

If I was a negotiator I wouldn't even publish an opener. Or if I was forced to, it would be the kind of general statement that everyone on this web forum seems to find unacceptable.

I'm a "total compenstaion" kinda guy. I agree with you on emphasizing the year end W-2. There are a lot of ways to get there besides the pay rates. Let the Wall Street Journal run the headline that Delta pilots got a smaller than expected bump in pay. What they don't put in their headline is stuff like --> Pay us 6 hours per day for vacation and training. Pay us for sitting in Toledo on a 30 hour layover. Lower our medical premiums. Increase in our DC contributions to the IRS maximum. etc. etc. All ways of putting money in our pockets without the headline generating pay rate increases.

I know a lot of the angst is because ALPA has lost people's trust. I'm one of them. The secret deals, the fait accompli joint ventures and LOAs and all that stuff and especially the scope concessions have really hurt our union's credibility. I understand that. But we really have no choice at this point except to trust these guys. The DPA fell short.
ALPA's overall strategy has not been kept secret. They have gone all-in with Moak's constructive engagement. We ratified that strategy when we elected them and we need to stand behind them now.
At least until we see a TA. Then we can judge.

And THAT'S why you can go to the Southwest hiring thread and see current Delta FOs giving people recommendations on how to fill out their SWA apps. Delta should be embarrassed about that, but somehow I doubt it.

Was Southwest embarrassed when in the late 90s people were leaving there for AA, Dal, or Ual? Doubt it because there are thousands waiting to take your place.

How many of our guys have signed nondisclosure agreements?

Can't tell you. That's non disclosed information.

The reason it's so important is that it represents the high water mark for our next contract. Whatever we open with, the final product will be no better. If the opener is way better than many of us expected, our MEC could expect (as they have in the past) strong support throughout negotiations from the members to hang tough and get as close to that opener as possible. If the opener is way worse than many of us expect, it is highly likely ALPA will be replaced and they know that. This is the reason they are not releasing the opener. And no, a "concept" is not the opener.

Pay rates are only a small portion. In the past, we've gotten a detailed summary sheet (20 plus pages) on each section and the details therein. For me, pay rates are the last thing I'll be looking at. If what is released is more than a "concept", the first place I'll look is Section 1. I'll be looking for our opening position to be reversing all outsourcing. The company can continue to fly whatever equipment they choose to purchase/lease, but Delta seniority list pilots must fly them. Then I'll look at work rules and want to see 80 hour reserve guarantees and 7 hour per day minimum pay guarantee. Then I'll look at retirement and expect to see a 20% contribution to everyone's DC. Then I'll look at health care and expect to see employee contributions half to that of SWA.

That would indicate a strong opener and would give me great comfort that our MEC gets it, and our negotiators are going to be fighting the right battles. If it's just a concept, then we'll be in the dark until the TA comes out. This is my biggest worry because it's how MEC's in the past have crammed down horrible agreements by scaring the hell out of our families right at the end.

It shows the MEMBERS what our high water mark will be. Members have a right to know these things. We're already kept way too much in the dark as it is with all the non-disclosure agreements our union leaders sign. The Section 6 process has no such restrictions placed on our leaders. Any restrictions are self imposed.

They aren't meaningless. You don't care to know...that's fine. Many others of us DO care and we have every right to know and be kept abreast every step of the way. It is OUR negotiations being done by OUR union, funded with OUR dues.

Actually, you're the one laboring under a misconception. If we only hand out a "concept" and keep the members mushroomed until the TA comes out, that will be something that's never happened before. That's NOT how it is supposed to happen, and it's NOT how it's gone in the past.

This is where the misunderstanding is Check. That long process is what the past YEAR has been all about. Gathering survey data from us. The EF&A guys analyzing all aspects of the company's financials and comparing our competitor's contracts, etc. This year + long process has been all about producing an opening position that will stand up against management and the NMB ulitmately. This year + long process has NOT been about producing a "concept". It's been about producing a highly detailed opening position. That opener exists...we just won't be seeing it apparently. Unless you consider a "concept" to be transparency.

Yes it does. It's the first and foundational step. If you don't ask, you'll never get.

Carl

I agree 100%. It's now time for the DPA to huddle everyone up and get behind the negotiators. The time for BBQ's and quasi-valid web surveys is long past. It's just divisive now and hurts us all.

Whether you agree with ALPA or not, we're now going to be dancing with the one that brought us. Telling your date that she's ugly and that you could do much better doesn't help your chances of succeeding (insert your definition of success here :D ) at the end of the night.

It's time for everyone to get on board. We all basically want the same thing.

Question for DPA guys: If DALPA were to negotiate C2012 to include massive restoration and scope reversals, would you be happy?

If the answer is yes, then you should be doing everything you can to support DALPA now, as they WILL be negotiating this contract.


**Full disclosure - I filled out a DPA card about 2 years ago and think the DPA movement served a very useful purpose. Unfortunately, they did not receive enough support and now our efforts will be most useful pushing the DALPA rock up the hill.

Other than that, no real validity. :eek: Other than THAT Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?

Exactly correct. And that's why it has huge validity and relevance to the members who FUND these negotiations.

My finances are in order, but a 5 year battle is wrong. You're assuming the NMB will treat us the same as AMR and LCC who had failed strategies.

Carl

Great post. Totally agree.

Carl