Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-13-2012 | 11:45 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,619
Likes: 0
Well folks, we must be close to a TA. Alfa is back defending DALPA communications and beginning the sell.
Just the first sentence of his above post is what I believe to be condescending and quite simply arrogant. "Junior guys" are subjected to reserve most often not by choice. Presently, they and their families live and breath the conditions and hardships of performing this on call duty for years at a time due to the shrinking of our seniority list and woefully inadequate section 1.
It has been my experience that these "junior guys who don't have enough knowledge of the contract to the issues of reserves" understand it inside and out. They can easily describe the good, the bad, the ugly, the pitfalls and few benefits inside and out. They know this section better than any line holding pilot or FPL bureaucrat.
So alfa, welcome back. It appears you will be quite busy here, on the other board, and in lounges in the near future. I hope we have a good and reasonable TA not only for us pilots but for DALPA as well. They have only one shot at this. However, in regards to the coming TA, it will be dissected here and across the web into the postitive and the negative. You are going to be busy. Just as busy as we are going to be doing a thorough due dilligence of a TA and disseminating that information as well.
Just the first sentence of his above post is what I believe to be condescending and quite simply arrogant. "Junior guys" are subjected to reserve most often not by choice. Presently, they and their families live and breath the conditions and hardships of performing this on call duty for years at a time due to the shrinking of our seniority list and woefully inadequate section 1.
It has been my experience that these "junior guys who don't have enough knowledge of the contract to the issues of reserves" understand it inside and out. They can easily describe the good, the bad, the ugly, the pitfalls and few benefits inside and out. They know this section better than any line holding pilot or FPL bureaucrat.
So alfa, welcome back. It appears you will be quite busy here, on the other board, and in lounges in the near future. I hope we have a good and reasonable TA not only for us pilots but for DALPA as well. They have only one shot at this. However, in regards to the coming TA, it will be dissected here and across the web into the postitive and the negative. You are going to be busy. Just as busy as we are going to be doing a thorough due dilligence of a TA and disseminating that information as well.
I said it was understandable that junior guys might not have had the time to understand all the related sections of the contract and thus have made incorrect analyses here. It is not understandable for a senior guy not to know his contract because that is just lazy. So once again, put your man pants on and quit whining like a little girl.
The reserve system we have now is light years better than the one I worked under when I was junior on reserve. We were on short call every day, we had no such thing as long call, and we had fewer days off. IF we reach an agreement, this reserve system will be the best reserve system we have ever had in my career at Delta. Even more days off, more pay, more opportunities to control your schedule. So quit playing the whiny poor me card, you are not the first pilot to stagnate on the list. I was an MD-88 first officer in year 8 of my career, boo hoo for me, let's all cry.
There are some items that are concessions but that is why they call it negotiations. Each side has to get something out of the deal. Management has a virtual 4 or 5 year free pass from the NMB if we want to act like thugs and just make demands. Please go ask American, United, Continental, and US Airways how their demand based negotiations have worked out. So do you want to wait 4 or 5 years or do you want to have a real negotiation that actually occurs in the grown up world?
IF we reach a deal, then we will improve every section of our contract, especially Section 1. We will also shove hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars in our pockets, IF we can reach a deal. A deal involves both sides agreeing. So unless you have someone's family member duct taped inside a closet, you better be ready to have some give and take at the table.
If you offer a monkey hundreds and hundreds of bananas and then want a few back, what do you think the monkey will do? Even a monkey will make that trade. So go ahead and vote no and complain, because you never stop complaining anyway. See, that is what it is like when I am condescending. Can you take it, or do you just dish it out?
05-13-2012 | 11:46 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,601
Likes: 0
From: Dismayed
You're right, Alfa's post is informative. Like it or not, and I'm not crazy about what's being advocated yet, it is perspective.
But I think what Dragon was getting at was there are two ways to handle this:
1) I think there are a lot of misconceptions about reserve staffing and the NNP. There are three issues that all interact to determine reserve staffing, they are:
-or-
2) Lots of junior guys here understandably don't have enough knowledge of the contract to understand the issueson reserve. There are three issues that all interact to determine reserve staffing, they are:
I think understanding reserve is for not a junior thing unless, as Sailing aptly mentioned, you're less than 3 digits on the seniority list. Or the guys I fly with wouldn't ask, so what is RAW score? Can you still high yellow? And so on.
I don't think reserve will make or break this contract, but reducing staffing requirements should and I can't wait to see what actually comes in the TA.
But I think what Dragon was getting at was there are two ways to handle this:
1) I think there are a lot of misconceptions about reserve staffing and the NNP. There are three issues that all interact to determine reserve staffing, they are:
-or-
2) Lots of junior guys here understandably don't have enough knowledge of the contract to understand the issueson reserve. There are three issues that all interact to determine reserve staffing, they are:
I think understanding reserve is for not a junior thing unless, as Sailing aptly mentioned, you're less than 3 digits on the seniority list. Or the guys I fly with wouldn't ask, so what is RAW score? Can you still high yellow? And so on.
I don't think reserve will make or break this contract, but reducing staffing requirements should and I can't wait to see what actually comes in the TA.
As usual you nailed. Franlkly Alfa's first post wasn't really that condescending, lets face it he's had worse. I was just taken aback by the tone. If it had started out a little more informative and a little less "let me splain it to ya", I would have seen the meat sooner.
05-13-2012 | 11:49 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,601
Likes: 0
From: Dismayed
I read your post before Alfa's, so I expected to find the snarky, condescending tone. Where is it?
If Alfa has a rationale for the ALV+15 bit, let him explain it. He didn't take any liberties in the process. If you still have problems with, argue your point.
I'm not sure I buy into the concept, but I've long advocated for Reserve "pay equality" (so to speak), so I want to see the whole package, to judge how a Reserve would be affected. Combined with a shorter SC, this might work.
George made some good points in an early post, and my takeway from it is that, on average, Reserves can't fly that much more, but for some individuals, in the middle of the summer, the leash is going to bite, and they'll have to fly 99 hours. If the days off are right, and the Reserve credit is right, this might cut both ways. Once I hit ALV - a couple when I was on Reserve, I was in for a penny, in for a pound... and I would put in a high yellow. The only thing that absolutely sucks on Reserve is to fly within a couple of minutes of guarantee, over and over. That was what the RAW score guaranteed, especially pre-bucket.
Honestly, I don't think the contract will hinge on Reserve, and I do see some concessionary aspects, but I think overall, what's in the NNP is about neutral, and I hope that what's not in the NNP will make it good.
If Alfa has a rationale for the ALV+15 bit, let him explain it. He didn't take any liberties in the process. If you still have problems with, argue your point.
I'm not sure I buy into the concept, but I've long advocated for Reserve "pay equality" (so to speak), so I want to see the whole package, to judge how a Reserve would be affected. Combined with a shorter SC, this might work.
George made some good points in an early post, and my takeway from it is that, on average, Reserves can't fly that much more, but for some individuals, in the middle of the summer, the leash is going to bite, and they'll have to fly 99 hours. If the days off are right, and the Reserve credit is right, this might cut both ways. Once I hit ALV - a couple when I was on Reserve, I was in for a penny, in for a pound... and I would put in a high yellow. The only thing that absolutely sucks on Reserve is to fly within a couple of minutes of guarantee, over and over. That was what the RAW score guaranteed, especially pre-bucket.
Honestly, I don't think the contract will hinge on Reserve, and I do see some concessionary aspects, but I think overall, what's in the NNP is about neutral, and I hope that what's not in the NNP will make it good.
I get that we work in a seniority based system and while my number has risen these past 4 years, the number below has risen as fast. Anything that affects the number of pilots on the DAL seniority list affects my QOL as well as all of us. Delta is being run like a business, and I'm happy that our leadership is being successful. But Delta passengers need to be flown by Delta pilots on the Delta seniority list. Bring all of the DCI on board and let's own this mutha!
05-13-2012 | 11:50 AM
meh
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 828
Likes: 0
Flew with several captains recently whose answer to everything I said was "well retirements are about to kick in and that will solve all your scope/stagnation concerns". No matter what I said on the company shrinking faster than we're retiring, or that concessionary steps like in this last NNP reduce the need for pilots faster than projected retirements, same answer:
"Retirements are gonna go crazy soon and for every 1 retirement there will be another leave for medical etc."
None of them had any numbers, they all thought retirements would be happening in 2013, and could/would not respond to the actual retirement projections posted on the ALPA calculator. They frankly didn't believe me that we're shrinking faster than retirements. It's frustrating to try to explain to them how small decreases in required manning can put off hiring and totally negate retirements through 2015 or 2016 easily.
So for this last year or so, 1 Apr 11 through the latest seniority list, here are some numbers:
1Apr11 thru 1 May 12
total pilots 1Apr11: 12,276 from seniority list that date
total pilots 1May12: 12,004
pilots lost: 272
total scheduled retirements from 1Apr11 thru 1May12: 9 (from ProjRet1104)
total spots I moved backwards between 2May11 pilot cat list (1106a) and most recent cat list as of 22Mar12:
73NB
SLC -9
NYC -4
ATL -11
CVG -1
LAX 0
320B, M88B are both similar-- a 0-10% drop in all cats but one (M88B in NYC I moved up 3%, still >3% avg. loss).
What's this say? That from all the best data published (category lists, retirement lists, and seniority lists) comparing the same period as close as you can, as a 10 year seniority guy I moved BACKWARDS 0-10%, but definitely backwards, in all spots, WHILE the company had 9 projected retirements and actually lost 272 pilots off the list! If I assume a 3% avg. backslide (which my thorough study of my cat #'s is way over), that's 360 pilots from todays 12,000 list. But we LOST 272, so that means the company actually SHRANK BY 632 PILOT POSITIONS! While we had 9 retirements. ( I was unable to pull last year's D2 and D3 requirements and only had Aug11 numbers to compare to current D2/D3 nums, and kept losing Deltanet connection. The D2/D3 differential was larger than my anecdotal 632, so I went with my derived empirical number as the lesser).
Now let's look to the future at these big supposed "game changing retirements":
2012: 13
2013: 80
2014: 132
2015: 184
2016: 246
Do you see how these retirements compare to what Delta shrank this year alone, 632 positions? They're nothing, easily subsumed within Delta's ability to reduce by marginal efficiencies! Just a 2% change in the pilot needs via some efficiency such as increased reserve utilization (!) will carry us all the way through the beginning of 2015 with no hiring right at the exact same (Overstaffed!) level! If you add another 2 years of retirements in 2015 & 2016 you lose another 430 pilots, that's 3.5% of today's list--just about "right sized" for increased reserve utilization and reduction of over-staffing at the end of 2016 with NO HIRING.
Now there will be all sorts of folks critique these trajectory predictions and claim, "Delta is about to grow, we'll need more pilots etc.", but NO DATA supports that claim... the only data out there shows a continuous and steady reduction of pilots required, outsourced flying and reduced needs. THIS is the real data and how it affects the bottom of the list. Retirements through 2016 are essentially negated by the company's demonstrated and historical plan and operations.
"Retirements are gonna go crazy soon and for every 1 retirement there will be another leave for medical etc."
None of them had any numbers, they all thought retirements would be happening in 2013, and could/would not respond to the actual retirement projections posted on the ALPA calculator. They frankly didn't believe me that we're shrinking faster than retirements. It's frustrating to try to explain to them how small decreases in required manning can put off hiring and totally negate retirements through 2015 or 2016 easily.
So for this last year or so, 1 Apr 11 through the latest seniority list, here are some numbers:
1Apr11 thru 1 May 12
total pilots 1Apr11: 12,276 from seniority list that date
total pilots 1May12: 12,004
pilots lost: 272
total scheduled retirements from 1Apr11 thru 1May12: 9 (from ProjRet1104)
total spots I moved backwards between 2May11 pilot cat list (1106a) and most recent cat list as of 22Mar12:
73NB
SLC -9
NYC -4
ATL -11
CVG -1
LAX 0
320B, M88B are both similar-- a 0-10% drop in all cats but one (M88B in NYC I moved up 3%, still >3% avg. loss).
What's this say? That from all the best data published (category lists, retirement lists, and seniority lists) comparing the same period as close as you can, as a 10 year seniority guy I moved BACKWARDS 0-10%, but definitely backwards, in all spots, WHILE the company had 9 projected retirements and actually lost 272 pilots off the list! If I assume a 3% avg. backslide (which my thorough study of my cat #'s is way over), that's 360 pilots from todays 12,000 list. But we LOST 272, so that means the company actually SHRANK BY 632 PILOT POSITIONS! While we had 9 retirements. ( I was unable to pull last year's D2 and D3 requirements and only had Aug11 numbers to compare to current D2/D3 nums, and kept losing Deltanet connection. The D2/D3 differential was larger than my anecdotal 632, so I went with my derived empirical number as the lesser).
Now let's look to the future at these big supposed "game changing retirements":
2012: 13
2013: 80
2014: 132
2015: 184
2016: 246
Do you see how these retirements compare to what Delta shrank this year alone, 632 positions? They're nothing, easily subsumed within Delta's ability to reduce by marginal efficiencies! Just a 2% change in the pilot needs via some efficiency such as increased reserve utilization (!) will carry us all the way through the beginning of 2015 with no hiring right at the exact same (Overstaffed!) level! If you add another 2 years of retirements in 2015 & 2016 you lose another 430 pilots, that's 3.5% of today's list--just about "right sized" for increased reserve utilization and reduction of over-staffing at the end of 2016 with NO HIRING.
Now there will be all sorts of folks critique these trajectory predictions and claim, "Delta is about to grow, we'll need more pilots etc.", but NO DATA supports that claim... the only data out there shows a continuous and steady reduction of pilots required, outsourced flying and reduced needs. THIS is the real data and how it affects the bottom of the list. Retirements through 2016 are essentially negated by the company's demonstrated and historical plan and operations.
Last edited by Roadkill; 05-13-2012 at 12:04 PM.
05-13-2012 | 12:01 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,357
Likes: 0
IF we reach an agreement, this reserve system will be the best reserve system we have ever had in my career at Delta. Even more days off, more pay, more opportunities to control your schedule. So quit playing the whiny poor me card, you are not the first pilot to stagnate on the list. I was an MD-88 first officer in year 8 of my career, boo hoo for me, let's all cry.
You are not one of us. You are a used car salesman with your own agenda. Please go back to your lot.
05-13-2012 | 12:03 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,357
Likes: 0
flew with several captains recently whose answer to everything i said was "well retirements are about to kick in and that will solve all your scope/stagnation concerns". No matter what i said on the company shrinking faster than we're retiring, or that concessionary steps like in this last nnp reduce the need for pilots faster than projected retirements, same answer:
"retirements are gonna go crazy soon and for every 1 retirement there will be another leave for medical etc."
none of them had any numbers, they all thought retirements would be happening in 2013, and could/would not respond to the actual retirement projections posted on the alpa calculator. They frankly didn't believe me that we're shrinking faster than retirements. It's frustrating to try to explain to them how small decreases in required manning can put off hiring and totally negate retirements through 2015 or 2016 easily.
So for this last year or so, 1 apr 11 through the latest seniority list, here are some numbers:
1apr11 thru 1 may 12
total pilots 1apr11: 12,276 from seniority list that date
total pilots 1may12: 12,004
pilots lost: 272
total scheduled retirements from 1apr11 thru 1may12: 9 (from projret1104)
total spots i moved backwards between 2may11 pilot cat list (1106a) and most recent cat list as of 22mar12:
73nb
slc -9
nyc -4
atl -11
cvg -1
lax 0
320b, m88b are both similar-- a 0-10% drop in all cats but one (m88b in nyc i moved up 3%, still >3% avg. Loss).
What's this say? That from all the best data published (category lists, retirement lists, and seniority lists) comparing the same period as close as you can, as a 10 year seniority guy i moved backwards 0-10%, but definitely backwards, in all spots, while the company had 9 projected retirements and actually lost 272 pilots off the list! If i assume a 3% avg. Backslide (which my thorough study of my cat #'s is way over), that's 360 pilots from todays 12,000 list. But we lost 272, so that means the company actually shrank by 632 pilot positions! While we had 9 retirements.
Now let's look to the future at these big supposed "game changing retirements":
2012: 13
2013: 80
2014: 132
2015: 184
2016: 246
do you see how these retirements compare to what delta shrank this year alone, 632 positions? They're nothing, easily subsumed within delta's ability to reduce by marginal efficiencies! Just a 2% change in the pilot needs via some efficiency such as increased reserve utilization (!) will carry us all the way through the beginning of 2015 with no hiring right at the exact same (overstaffed!) level! If you add another 2 years of retirements in 2015 & 2016 you lose another 430 pilots, that's 3.5% of today's list--just about "right sized" for increased reserve utilization and reduction of over-staffing at the end of 2016 with no hiring.
Now there will be all sorts of folks critique these trajectory predictions and claim, "delta is about to grow, we'll need more pilots etc.", but no data supports that claim... The only data out there shows a continuous and steady reduction of pilots required, outsourced flying and reduced needs. This is the real data and how it affects the bottom of the list. Retirements through 2016 are essentially negated by the company's demonstrated and historical plan and operations.
"retirements are gonna go crazy soon and for every 1 retirement there will be another leave for medical etc."
none of them had any numbers, they all thought retirements would be happening in 2013, and could/would not respond to the actual retirement projections posted on the alpa calculator. They frankly didn't believe me that we're shrinking faster than retirements. It's frustrating to try to explain to them how small decreases in required manning can put off hiring and totally negate retirements through 2015 or 2016 easily.
So for this last year or so, 1 apr 11 through the latest seniority list, here are some numbers:
1apr11 thru 1 may 12
total pilots 1apr11: 12,276 from seniority list that date
total pilots 1may12: 12,004
pilots lost: 272
total scheduled retirements from 1apr11 thru 1may12: 9 (from projret1104)
total spots i moved backwards between 2may11 pilot cat list (1106a) and most recent cat list as of 22mar12:
73nb
slc -9
nyc -4
atl -11
cvg -1
lax 0
320b, m88b are both similar-- a 0-10% drop in all cats but one (m88b in nyc i moved up 3%, still >3% avg. Loss).
What's this say? That from all the best data published (category lists, retirement lists, and seniority lists) comparing the same period as close as you can, as a 10 year seniority guy i moved backwards 0-10%, but definitely backwards, in all spots, while the company had 9 projected retirements and actually lost 272 pilots off the list! If i assume a 3% avg. Backslide (which my thorough study of my cat #'s is way over), that's 360 pilots from todays 12,000 list. But we lost 272, so that means the company actually shrank by 632 pilot positions! While we had 9 retirements.
Now let's look to the future at these big supposed "game changing retirements":
2012: 13
2013: 80
2014: 132
2015: 184
2016: 246
do you see how these retirements compare to what delta shrank this year alone, 632 positions? They're nothing, easily subsumed within delta's ability to reduce by marginal efficiencies! Just a 2% change in the pilot needs via some efficiency such as increased reserve utilization (!) will carry us all the way through the beginning of 2015 with no hiring right at the exact same (overstaffed!) level! If you add another 2 years of retirements in 2015 & 2016 you lose another 430 pilots, that's 3.5% of today's list--just about "right sized" for increased reserve utilization and reduction of over-staffing at the end of 2016 with no hiring.
Now there will be all sorts of folks critique these trajectory predictions and claim, "delta is about to grow, we'll need more pilots etc.", but no data supports that claim... The only data out there shows a continuous and steady reduction of pilots required, outsourced flying and reduced needs. This is the real data and how it affects the bottom of the list. Retirements through 2016 are essentially negated by the company's demonstrated and historical plan and operations.
05-13-2012 | 12:07 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
No matter when we get this TA, I will look at in its entirety.
The entirety of Section 1.
And the entirety of Section 2-28.
Those two won't be mixed anymore than the hot girls at Auburn wanted to be mixed with FTB in the late 90s.
Just sayin.
The entirety of Section 1.
And the entirety of Section 2-28.
Those two won't be mixed anymore than the hot girls at Auburn wanted to be mixed with FTB in the late 90s.
Just sayin.
05-13-2012 | 12:11 PM
meh
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 828
Likes: 0
nm..................
Last edited by Roadkill; 05-13-2012 at 12:47 PM.
05-13-2012 | 12:13 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
I doubt we would see the 717 if we allow more large RJs. The company is going to retire about 200 50-seaters. Some of the contracts out there allow the 50-seaters to trickle out; others just end cold turkey.
200 50-seaters out = 10,000 seats. That's a big hole network has to fill. They need to make a decision and they need to make it very soon. I believe this is why we are in expedited negotiations. The question the company needs answered is, "Who's going to fly this lift?"
88 717s = 10,300 seats (what a coincidence). This would be just about capacity neutral. If we do NOTHING to our RJ scope, nearly all of the capacity lost due to 50-seater retirements would have to be replaced here at MAINLINE.
You're right, the hard cap on large RJs is 255. the ALPA people I've been talking to (MEC & local) are MISLEADING people by saying the company can just simply add more 76 seat RJs once we get to 768 mainline A/C. They are really not "adding" anything, they have to REMOVE a 70 seat get for every 76 seat jet they add. For some reason they casually forget to mention that.
What if we let the company have more large RJs in this contract? I've heard that 2:1 is what they are leaning toward. Would this reduce RJ block hours? Yes, but we sell seats, not pilot block hours here at Delta.
Sure the company would lose 10,000 seats worth of 50-seaters, but they would gain 7600 of them back with more large RJs. I highly doubt they would get the 717 under these circumstances. I would expect to here them announce that the price just wasn't right but they were able to get some great rates on a handful of A319s. all it would take is about 20 A319s to get back to capacity neutral in this case resulting in fewer mainline jobs.
The only way we'll get a TA out in the near term is if it allows more large RJs, lots and lots of them. Our current RJ scope is the only thing standing in the way.
200 50-seaters out = 10,000 seats. That's a big hole network has to fill. They need to make a decision and they need to make it very soon. I believe this is why we are in expedited negotiations. The question the company needs answered is, "Who's going to fly this lift?"
88 717s = 10,300 seats (what a coincidence). This would be just about capacity neutral. If we do NOTHING to our RJ scope, nearly all of the capacity lost due to 50-seater retirements would have to be replaced here at MAINLINE.
You're right, the hard cap on large RJs is 255. the ALPA people I've been talking to (MEC & local) are MISLEADING people by saying the company can just simply add more 76 seat RJs once we get to 768 mainline A/C. They are really not "adding" anything, they have to REMOVE a 70 seat get for every 76 seat jet they add. For some reason they casually forget to mention that.
What if we let the company have more large RJs in this contract? I've heard that 2:1 is what they are leaning toward. Would this reduce RJ block hours? Yes, but we sell seats, not pilot block hours here at Delta.
Sure the company would lose 10,000 seats worth of 50-seaters, but they would gain 7600 of them back with more large RJs. I highly doubt they would get the 717 under these circumstances. I would expect to here them announce that the price just wasn't right but they were able to get some great rates on a handful of A319s. all it would take is about 20 A319s to get back to capacity neutral in this case resulting in fewer mainline jobs.
The only way we'll get a TA out in the near term is if it allows more large RJs, lots and lots of them. Our current RJ scope is the only thing standing in the way.
05-13-2012 | 12:15 PM
Banned
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 623
Likes: 0
From: DAL
Exactly. Didn't we just negotiate for 6 shortcalls? Why are we throwing the reserve guys under the bus?
and why do I feel like I need to check my pocket for my wallet (and take a shower) every time the FPL-collecting, unelected ALPA bureaucrats try to sell me a lemon?
and why do I feel like I need to check my pocket for my wallet (and take a shower) every time the FPL-collecting, unelected ALPA bureaucrats try to sell me a lemon?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
