![]() |
Originally Posted by dalad
(Post 1149900)
We won't see a contract for five years. Management has no reason to get it done. This thingy called the RLA and the fact that the UCAL pilots can't get a contract done and the mess at LCC is our undoing. Management can buy anyone or anything and we can't do anything about it. Oh, and don't forget the rape of the AMR pilots that is about to begin. And no, I haven't been staring at an orange juice carton because it says "concentrate".
To me, five years is not their plan if they are hoping to "grow."
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1150055)
You have to attempt to view it from a management standpoint. They have spent five years in a reeducation campaign with the other employees that Delta will only be able to pay industry standard wages. They are correct in their cost assumptions to an extent. This is perhaps the most brutal industry around on companies that let costs get out of line.
A pilot contract that is viewed as above the abstract they have created with the other employees will lead to big problems. After our 2001 contract they had to follow up with a 17 percent raise to the mechanics when things started to get ugly there. I suspect they will be willing to put forth a contract with some impressive numbers in the out years. They will not put out anything near what I or most pilots expect in the short term. The collapse of talks at UAL and the 1113 action at AMR will leave the company thinking and serious raises for the pilots will put their pilot costs way to high and that they will have other costs with non union employee fallout. The package they put forth will be back loaded while the package we want and deserve will have to be front loaded. I see the gap between the two as far to big to be bridged before we go to the NBM. The NMB has made it clear we can expect a very long process if we go that route. Again this is going to be a long difficult contract with a lot of choices that have to be made. Don't start spending raises now. They may not come for 5 years. I'm fine with that. We should focus on getting this right. These Section 6s sure don't come all that often, why rush it out of fear? We low ball ourselves out of the time value of money fear and we just end up merging again with a crappy contract and not seeing another section 6 for a decade. So the fear of "it could take five years!" should never sway our commitment to ourselves. In the meanwhile... http://theticket-atlanta.com/wp-cont...ho-600x462.jpg |
If I may humbly ask, why are you guys shooting for swa's contract? I would shoot for FedEx's contract 261 hourly for 777 captain at the top and 115 second year Fo for the 757 plus good work rules. No regional either. Easier said then done but they fly boxes, you fly people.
|
Originally Posted by PinnacleFO
(Post 1150103)
If I may humbly ask, why are you guys shooting for swa's contract? I would shoot for FedEx's contract 261 hourly for 777 captain at the top and 115 second year Fo for the 757 plus good work rules. No regional either. Easier said then done but they fly boxes, you fly people.
Further, they rarely make nare a peep on the subject of scope (which could have a more profound affect compensation wise and quality of life wise for the bottom 6000 pilots at this airline than just about anything else short of a big infusion of pilotless widebodies). How do you like them apples?:confused: |
There will be a lot of angst among the pilots over the time line of the negotiations, but it is what it is. Buzz, you say UCAL is kicking the can down the road? They have failed miserably if that's the case. Let's not even discuss the disfunctional LCC group. We have no leverage as long as the others don't get improvements to their own contracts. This will be the fourth contract negotiation since I was hired, not including the bankruptcy concessions X 2, and the merger contract. In 1990 we got a fairly good contract after NWA got a good one, in 96 we took a 2% paycut and in 2000 we got UAL plus 1. we won't see anything for five years minimum.
|
Originally Posted by Jack Bauer
(Post 1150105)
Most Delta pilots agree we should be shooting for these numbers and higher. Yet we are given a lot of reasons by our representation it's not a fair comparison (boxes vs pax).
Aw man, let me show you something that will totally blow that out of the water and prove once in for all that there is no money in cargo. Exhibit A) Parked NWA 732s: http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2321/4...e240ab38_z.jpg Exhibit B) Air France 744F. http://static.flickr.com/3277/2727269580_48343f9478.jpg Wait. There is money in cargo. Just not us doing cargo? Is that what they meant?
Originally Posted by Jack Bauer
(Post 1150105)
Then we ask whether comparing to another airline flying one of our smaller airplane types out of our largest base would be a good way to prop up our narrow body rates (ie we get parity with their 737 rates then winch up the rates an equal amount for airframes larger than this). Those who currently represent us tell us this is a bad strategy but be prepared for 5 years of stalemate with the NMB if we expect restoration (which they say likely wont be achieved).
Further, they rarely make nare a peep on the subject of scope (which could have a more profound affect compensation wise and quality of life wise for the bottom 6000 pilots at this airline than just about anything else short of a big infusion of pilotless widebodies). How do you like them apples? http://i938.photobucket.com/albums/a...d/temp2-27.png |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1150055)
You have to attempt to view it from a management standpoint. They have spent five years in a reeducation campaign with the other employees that Delta will only be able to pay industry standard wages. They are correct in their cost assumptions to an extent. This is perhaps the most brutal industry around on companies that let costs get out of line.
A pilot contract that is viewed as above the abstract they have created with the other employees will lead to big problems. After our 2001 contract they had to follow up with a 17 percent raise to the mechanics when things started to get ugly there. I suspect they will be willing to put forth a contract with some impressive numbers in the out years. They will not put out anything near what I or most pilots expect in the short term. The collapse of talks at UAL and the 1113 action at AMR will leave the company thinking and serious raises for the pilots will put their pilot costs way to high and that they will have other costs with non union employee fallout. The package they put forth will be back loaded while the package we want and deserve will have to be front loaded. I see the gap between the two as far to big to be bridged before we go to the NBM. The NMB has made it clear we can expect a very long process if we go that route. Again this is going to be a long difficult contract with a lot of choices that have to be made. Don't start spending raises now. They may not come for 5 years. Carl |
How the Airbus A380 Squeezes into the U.S. Airline Model - TheStreet
ATLANTA (TheStreet) -- The Airbus A380 is a very big airplane, and the U.S. aviation system is very slowly growing into it -- even though not a single U.S. carrier has ordered one. That growth was evident last week, when Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport said it will start work on gate and runway improvements to accommodate Korean Air service to Seoul on an A380, seating 407 passengers. The airport says flights could begin as soon as January. Whenever the flights begin, Korean would fly in full cooperation with its partner, Delta, which operates the world's busiest hub at Atlanta. Delta also has a trans-Pacific joint venture with Korean, complete with antitrust immunity, enabling the carriers to schedule and price jointly, to split revenues and to code share, writing tickets on one another's flights. The two airlines already partner on A380 flights from Seoul to Los Angeles and New York and code-share on Korean A380 flights from Seoul to Hong Kong. Additionally, Air France A380 flights from Paris to New York and Washington Dulles are part of a trans-Atlantic joint venture with Delta. In each case, Delta and its partners take advantage of partnership models that barely existed when the A380 first flew in 2007, soon after its positive reception on its first New York visit. "The obvious question here is: Why would Delta ever want to order an A380? Its partners can operate the aircraft and Delta can get many of the benefits". |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1150118)
Whoa whoa whoa. What are you saying, there is money in boxes?
Aw man, let me show you something that will totally blow that out of the water and prove once in for all that there is no money in cargo. Exhibit A) Parked NWA 732s: http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2321/4...e240ab38_z.jpg Exhibit B) Air France 744F. http://static.flickr.com/3277/2727269580_48343f9478.jpg [/IMG] |
|
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1150119)
You keep saying this sailingfun despite the FACT that their PowerPoint said no such thing. And people who were in the room said the NMB stated no such thing. Please post ANY evidence to back up what you claim. My evidence is the NMB's PowerPoint and the words of my reps. What's your evidence?
Carl |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:31 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands