Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-13-2012, 01:32 PM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by scambo1
T;
Thanks for coming back to the "its not all rosy" fold. I was beginning to wonder.
This NN...with direction from the NDA signing MEC (who fancy themselves as members of the BOD), in an effort to "fix" the companies problems with upcoming retirements, is proposing to decrease the DAL manning requirement (even though there are hints at "promises" of growth).
They are smoothing out the training ripples...lets see if they further try to smooth them out with paybanding and longevity pay...DAL MEC: Fixing managements problems and telling the pilots it's good for them for 8 years.
So much for leverage.
Thanks for coming back to the "its not all rosy" fold. I was beginning to wonder.
This NN...with direction from the NDA signing MEC (who fancy themselves as members of the BOD), in an effort to "fix" the companies problems with upcoming retirements, is proposing to decrease the DAL manning requirement (even though there are hints at "promises" of growth).
They are smoothing out the training ripples...lets see if they further try to smooth them out with paybanding and longevity pay...DAL MEC: Fixing managements problems and telling the pilots it's good for them for 8 years.
So much for leverage.
05-13-2012, 01:35 PM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by alfaromeo
Can you take it, or do you just dish it out?
05-13-2012, 01:43 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: 737n/FO
Posts: 667
Originally Posted by Wasatch Phantom
Sailing,
I'm really not trying to be obtuse or trolling, etc.
As my financial advisor says "It's the after tax income that's important..."
So in my example of say an L-1011 Captain who made say $275,000 a year in 1999 and he contributed zero to his defined benefit retirement plan. He was taxed on the $275K and netted $275K less federal and state income taxes, social security, and let's not forget ALPA dues. To make the math simple lets say a combined 35%. So he took home $275K less 35% ($96,250) =$178,750. And he had a defined benefit retirement plan that (in theory anyway) paid him a retirement of 60% FAE.
(Ill use myself as an example.) I had my DB plan taken from me and as a deadzoner I am doing my best to fund my retirement to the tune of the maximum allowable individual contribution. For 2012 that is $17,500 plus the $5,000 (over 50) catch up = $22,500.
So for me as an A-320 Captain my hourly rate is $175.00. Let's say $175K for the year. take away the (forced) retirement contribution of $22.5K and your down to $152,500 and lets say a combined tax/benefit rate of 35% ($53,375) and my take home is $99,125.
That's just over half of what the L-1011 Captain netted in my example above. HMMM not too good, is it?
My point is he didn't have to fund his retirement and we now do.
I'm really not trying to be obtuse or trolling, etc.
As my financial advisor says "It's the after tax income that's important..."
So in my example of say an L-1011 Captain who made say $275,000 a year in 1999 and he contributed zero to his defined benefit retirement plan. He was taxed on the $275K and netted $275K less federal and state income taxes, social security, and let's not forget ALPA dues. To make the math simple lets say a combined 35%. So he took home $275K less 35% ($96,250) =$178,750. And he had a defined benefit retirement plan that (in theory anyway) paid him a retirement of 60% FAE.
(Ill use myself as an example.) I had my DB plan taken from me and as a deadzoner I am doing my best to fund my retirement to the tune of the maximum allowable individual contribution. For 2012 that is $17,500 plus the $5,000 (over 50) catch up = $22,500.
So for me as an A-320 Captain my hourly rate is $175.00. Let's say $175K for the year. take away the (forced) retirement contribution of $22.5K and your down to $152,500 and lets say a combined tax/benefit rate of 35% ($53,375) and my take home is $99,125.
That's just over half of what the L-1011 Captain netted in my example above. HMMM not too good, is it?
My point is he didn't have to fund his retirement and we now do.
05-13-2012, 01:45 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,619
Originally Posted by Jack Bauer
BS! BS! BS! BS! BS! BS! BS! BS! BS! BS!
You are not one of us. You are a used car salesman with your own agenda. Please go back to your lot.
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, 01:47 PM
Super Moderator
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 6,881
DAL Reserve System
Originally Posted by alfaromeo
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.
Feel free to disagree with Alfa but I believe he is correct on what I have bolded above. Reserve rules at DAL have been a lot worse in the past. When I was hired you had two short call windows every day, 0800-0900 and 2000-2100 if I remember correctly, every day of reserve.
Granted a lot of other things were better back then, almost everything else as a matter of fact, but that does not change the fact that he is correct about the above. You could argue that it is irrelevant what the rules were back then, or you can try to make a case for them being relevant. If that is the case then I would say C2000 pay-rates are also relevant.
Scoop
05-13-2012, 01:51 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,993
Originally Posted by casual observer
I enjoy reading the threads here, but I find myself thinking the representation here is narrow in relation to the pilot group. I've been at delta about 14 years and although I understand the importance of scope, there are other important issues to me and, I believe, to us as a pilot group. It seems reasonable to me that during a normal negotiation, both sides make concessions. It seems logical to me that at some point, being unwilling to make some concessions could be counterproductive. I don't understand the idea of being unwilling to compromise on one individual issue, regardless of what else is on the table. I also feel that although the piloting profession has suffered in terms of wages in real dollars; advancements in safety, navigation and communication make the job more comfortable today then when it enjoyed greater compensation. I don't follow these issues as closely as most people here do. I'm open to changing my mind, but for now I tend to think the opinions here are mostly an unrealistic minority view.
Because scope involves unity and pilots jobs, two items that should not be open to negotiations. How would you feel if your job was being "conceded" ? At 14 years, it might be your upgrade that is the point of scope negotiations.
05-13-2012, 01:51 PM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by alfaromeo
Okay, when was the reserve system better?
05-13-2012, 01:56 PM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by Scoop
Guys,
Feel free to disagree with Alfa but I believe he is correct on what I have bolded above. Reserve rules at DAL have been a lot worse in the past. When I was hired you had two short call windows every day, 0800-0900 and 2000-2100 if I remember correctly, every day of reserve.
Granted a lot of other things were better back then, almost everything else as a matter of fact, but that does not change the fact that he is correct about the above. You could argue that it is irrelevant what the rules were back then, or you can try to make a case for them being relevant. If that is the case then I would say C2000 pay-rates are also relevant.
Scoop
Feel free to disagree with Alfa but I believe he is correct on what I have bolded above. Reserve rules at DAL have been a lot worse in the past. When I was hired you had two short call windows every day, 0800-0900 and 2000-2100 if I remember correctly, every day of reserve.
Granted a lot of other things were better back then, almost everything else as a matter of fact, but that does not change the fact that he is correct about the above. You could argue that it is irrelevant what the rules were back then, or you can try to make a case for them being relevant. If that is the case then I would say C2000 pay-rates are also relevant.
Scoop
05-13-2012, 01:58 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: Captain
Posts: 826
Originally Posted by Scoop
Guys,
Feel free to disagree with Alfa but I believe he is correct on what I have bolded above. Reserve rules at DAL have been a lot worse in the past. When I was hired you had two short call windows every day, 0800-0900 and 2000-2100 if I remember correctly, every day of reserve.
Granted a lot of other things were better back then, almost everything else as a matter of fact, but that does not change the fact that he is correct about the above. You could argue that it is irrelevant what the rules were back then, or you can try to make a case for them being relevant. If that is the case then I would say C2000 pay-rates are also relevant.
Scoop
Feel free to disagree with Alfa but I believe he is correct on what I have bolded above. Reserve rules at DAL have been a lot worse in the past. When I was hired you had two short call windows every day, 0800-0900 and 2000-2100 if I remember correctly, every day of reserve.
Granted a lot of other things were better back then, almost everything else as a matter of fact, but that does not change the fact that he is correct about the above. You could argue that it is irrelevant what the rules were back then, or you can try to make a case for them being relevant. If that is the case then I would say C2000 pay-rates are also relevant.
Scoop
C2K eliminated PMM and restricted YS to DOA, but also introduced the long call window we have now.
I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
05-13-2012, 01:59 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Posts: 1,724
My observations:
Pilot unity is crucial, especially when negotiating a contract. Its management's job to divide and conquer the pilot group. These guys: Ford & Harrison, Labor and Employment Law Firm specialize in that and one of the founding members of the firm is on the Delta BOD. As someone who has been through a union drive to get ALPA representation, I can tell you pitting one group against another is their specialty...Reserve, line-holder, Small base vs large, widebody vs narrow, senior vs junior, North vs South, ALP vs DPA are all distractions that help reduce our resolve and lessen our chances for the best contract possible. We are all Delta pilots, lets have each other's back. The girls wil help the manly-men and the manly-men will help the girls...
The manning formula is like catastrophic emergency insurance. Its good to know it's there, you hope to never use it because things will have really gone to hell when it kicks in. What exactly does the 60 hrs average/ reserve in the manning formula looks like:
Let's say it's a particularly busy summer flying season, a reserve averages 90 hrs for the three summer months June, July and August. That's 270 hrs cumulative for the three months. Using the formula of 60/reserve average, staffing would only increase if the same reserve averaged 50 hrs for the remaining 9 months of the year:
60 x 12 = 720 annually
90 x 3 = 270
50 x 9 = 450
Total 720
As you see the three months in summer just don't really impact the manning formula, which is why the other limits in the PWA are so crucial. Taking days-off away from when you're swamped in June and August and redistributing them to the months where there is little flying just isn't a gain in QOL no matter how you spin it...
Adding a day of SC is a concession, especially if the inequity of the 24 hr short-call for international reserves will be patched by the upcoming FTDT regs. Remember the reduction from 8 to 6 short-call days in 2008, was presented as a key accomplishment of the JCBA according to TO and LM (NNP 08-03 & From the Chairman June 3, 2008)
Ask yourself this: why would Delta ask for the changes to reserve rules as presented in the NNP if it would have no effect on staffing, reserve schedules and green-slips? Delta plans on using the new higher limits or they wouldn't have asked for them, isn't that self evident? It would be like pilots asking the company for higher pay but suggesting that not everybody would be drawing the new higher amount.
As I said before: The changes to the reserve rules have a potential to have an adverse impact on staffing, availability of premium flying and reduce the protections in the current PWA that help put a lid on how far a reserve can be pushed during a busy period. If the negotiation also produce increases in vacation and bring any sheduled non-flying activity into the ADP formula much of the potential adverse impact on reserves can be mitigated while getting gains for all pilots regardless of bid-status. I am awaiting the forthcoming NNP that might detail exactly those changes...
Cheers
George
Pilot unity is crucial, especially when negotiating a contract. Its management's job to divide and conquer the pilot group. These guys: Ford & Harrison, Labor and Employment Law Firm specialize in that and one of the founding members of the firm is on the Delta BOD. As someone who has been through a union drive to get ALPA representation, I can tell you pitting one group against another is their specialty...Reserve, line-holder, Small base vs large, widebody vs narrow, senior vs junior, North vs South, ALP vs DPA are all distractions that help reduce our resolve and lessen our chances for the best contract possible. We are all Delta pilots, lets have each other's back. The girls wil help the manly-men and the manly-men will help the girls...
The manning formula is like catastrophic emergency insurance. Its good to know it's there, you hope to never use it because things will have really gone to hell when it kicks in. What exactly does the 60 hrs average/ reserve in the manning formula looks like:
Let's say it's a particularly busy summer flying season, a reserve averages 90 hrs for the three summer months June, July and August. That's 270 hrs cumulative for the three months. Using the formula of 60/reserve average, staffing would only increase if the same reserve averaged 50 hrs for the remaining 9 months of the year:
60 x 12 = 720 annually
90 x 3 = 270
50 x 9 = 450
Total 720
As you see the three months in summer just don't really impact the manning formula, which is why the other limits in the PWA are so crucial. Taking days-off away from when you're swamped in June and August and redistributing them to the months where there is little flying just isn't a gain in QOL no matter how you spin it...
Adding a day of SC is a concession, especially if the inequity of the 24 hr short-call for international reserves will be patched by the upcoming FTDT regs. Remember the reduction from 8 to 6 short-call days in 2008, was presented as a key accomplishment of the JCBA according to TO and LM (NNP 08-03 & From the Chairman June 3, 2008)
Ask yourself this: why would Delta ask for the changes to reserve rules as presented in the NNP if it would have no effect on staffing, reserve schedules and green-slips? Delta plans on using the new higher limits or they wouldn't have asked for them, isn't that self evident? It would be like pilots asking the company for higher pay but suggesting that not everybody would be drawing the new higher amount.
As I said before: The changes to the reserve rules have a potential to have an adverse impact on staffing, availability of premium flying and reduce the protections in the current PWA that help put a lid on how far a reserve can be pushed during a busy period. If the negotiation also produce increases in vacation and bring any sheduled non-flying activity into the ADP formula much of the potential adverse impact on reserves can be mitigated while getting gains for all pilots regardless of bid-status. I am awaiting the forthcoming NNP that might detail exactly those changes...
Cheers
George
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
