Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-13-2012 | 05:25 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,724
Likes: 0
From: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Fell free to PM me for details...
Cheers
George
05-13-2012 | 05:32 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,462
Likes: 0
We are in deep trouble.
It is painful to read a post like that from a guy like Pineapple. And to log on here and see the connected guys like alfaromeo and slowplay begin their defense of this latest concessionary round of bargaining is just devastating.
This TA is gonna be ugly and its gonna pass and there's nothing we can do to stop it.
Management, the bankruptcy courts and the NMB have done their jobs efficiently and effectively.
The "reset" of the airline piloting profession over the last 10 years has been successful.
There will be no "restoration". Our union has already conceded the fight.
It is painful to read a post like that from a guy like Pineapple. And to log on here and see the connected guys like alfaromeo and slowplay begin their defense of this latest concessionary round of bargaining is just devastating.
This TA is gonna be ugly and its gonna pass and there's nothing we can do to stop it.
Management, the bankruptcy courts and the NMB have done their jobs efficiently and effectively.
The "reset" of the airline piloting profession over the last 10 years has been successful.
There will be no "restoration". Our union has already conceded the fight.
Well, that illusion was shattered in bankruptcy. Southwest pilots make more than us for one simple reason -- they work for an extremely profitable company, and they are extremely efficient in their works rules. They've never had a DB, they paid for their own type rating, and they've NEVER led the industry in anything. They have virtually no training costs, because they have a single fleet. And yet, even now, they are treading water waiting for us to pass them in pay, so they can have their cost advantage again.
We should be able to make their wages, because our network can generate more RASM than theirs, and I'm willing to fight to get that. But this is a math exercise, not an emotional one.
And no one is giving up -- we will get exactly what we negotiate; but what we used to make is irrelevant. Totally irrelevant. The world has changed -- accept that, and make the most of it.
05-13-2012 | 05:38 PM
Line Holder
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 993
Likes: 0
From: VEOP Retired! 7ER A was last position
Wish I could have been there too TC. But I take issue with what I've bolded above and would ask you to consider this carefully. There is such a thing as a poison pill in a contract. You may have struck the best deal in the world for selling your home...way above market price with a quick closing while the new owners give you all the time you wish to move out. You even get to come back anytime you want for visits. But there's one teeny little sentence in there...just one. It says that you still have to pay the mortgage for the new owners. Now the totality of the agreement is incredible - but how about that one little sentence?
Delta's C2K contract looked good in its totalilty at the time. But there WAS a poison pill in it whereby more large RJ's were accepted. That single provision allowed for furloughing thousands of our brother pilots while the regionals hired thousands.
I know this will sound hard headed by me, but no matter how good this TA ends up looking (and it already is concessionary), all that good is nullified if we allow more 76 seat jets to be flown by non-Delta pilots. That is our poison pill. If we send the TA back to the negotiating committee with a single note saying: "We're fine with this except remove the allowance of any more 76 seaters"...and the company turns us down flat and walks away, you'll understand EXACTLY what management's plan was. If you vote to allow it, you'll soon learn EXACTLY what management's plan is.
Carl - the hard head.
Delta's C2K contract looked good in its totalilty at the time. But there WAS a poison pill in it whereby more large RJ's were accepted. That single provision allowed for furloughing thousands of our brother pilots while the regionals hired thousands.
I know this will sound hard headed by me, but no matter how good this TA ends up looking (and it already is concessionary), all that good is nullified if we allow more 76 seat jets to be flown by non-Delta pilots. That is our poison pill. If we send the TA back to the negotiating committee with a single note saying: "We're fine with this except remove the allowance of any more 76 seaters"...and the company turns us down flat and walks away, you'll understand EXACTLY what management's plan was. If you vote to allow it, you'll soon learn EXACTLY what management's plan is.
Carl - the hard head.
Let's assume the company wants to dump a lot of 50 seaters. These jets are replaced by SOME more 76 seaters and 717/319's. The net result is DCI block hours reduce moderately and ML block hours go up moderately We get ironclad language protecting us from furlough in regards to parking those extra jets, removing seats or flow down (if we choose) Finally, assume we don't cave at a later date with an LOA or concession to remove some of these key restrictions. Is this a bad deal if DCI shrinks and ML grows? Remember these 76 seaters are already at DCI. I don't think we'd be setting any precedence that could be used against us in the future.
05-13-2012 | 05:46 PM
Line Holder
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 868
Likes: 18
From: Starboard Side, weekends & holidays.
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'm sorry, but I just don't understand this line of thought at all. Without a solid Section 1, everything else is meaningless. So, I've got this house, and it's still a pretty nice house. It's not as shiny as it once was, but it's still pretty nice. That being said, I'd love to replace the windows, maybe build a new deck, replace some old carpet with nice hardwoods, you get the idea. Problem is, the foundation has been crumbling for the past 10 years. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me to worry about windows and the like when the whole place is in danger of falling in on itself.
(Apologies for the crude metaphor. I've spent my "vacation week" doing home repairs. As far as I know, my actual foundation is just fine. Our PWA's foundation, on the other hand......)
05-13-2012 | 05:51 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
Now if you're in base, hey, what fun. Show up at 10pm and be done at 6am 30 hours later. But just be happy with a 65 hour line with a lot of days tied up.
Hopefully the survey gave the NC a firm direction to go in as far as whether to keep that or dump it.
05-13-2012 | 05:53 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,070
Likes: 1
From: Urban chicken rancher.
05-13-2012 | 05:54 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Alright Carl, I'll take a shot at this....
Let's assume the company wants to dump a lot of 50 seaters. These jets are replaced by SOME more 76 seaters and 717/319's. The net result is DCI block hours reduce moderately and ML block hours go up moderately We get ironclad language protecting us from furlough in regards to parking those extra jets, removing seats or flow down (if we choose) Finally, assume we don't cave at a later date with an LOA or concession to remove some of these key restrictions. Is this a bad deal if DCI shrinks and ML grows? Remember these 76 seaters are already at DCI. I don't think we'd be setting any precedence that could be used against us in the future.
Let's assume the company wants to dump a lot of 50 seaters. These jets are replaced by SOME more 76 seaters and 717/319's. The net result is DCI block hours reduce moderately and ML block hours go up moderately We get ironclad language protecting us from furlough in regards to parking those extra jets, removing seats or flow down (if we choose) Finally, assume we don't cave at a later date with an LOA or concession to remove some of these key restrictions. Is this a bad deal if DCI shrinks and ML grows? Remember these 76 seaters are already at DCI. I don't think we'd be setting any precedence that could be used against us in the future.
Question for you guys. What if, stay with me on this, the company said "hey DALPA, we love the 76 seat jet so much we want to operate 200. In return for letting us have 200 76 seat jets that will be the total number of jets we can operate with more than 50 seats."
Or 225 or whatever. We would be reducing the number of 70-76 seat jets by 55? But allowing more 76 jets in the process. Catch 22.
05-13-2012 | 05:54 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,070
Likes: 1
From: Urban chicken rancher.
If any of you homies get a chance to see Snow Patrol in concert, do it! They rocked the pool at the Cosmopolitan in Vegas last night. Awesome show!
05-13-2012 | 05:57 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,070
Likes: 1
From: Urban chicken rancher.
05-13-2012 | 05:59 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,070
Likes: 1
From: Urban chicken rancher.
Take a look at the 73 LAX open time....that's all you'll see. Nobody wants those, especially the MCO one.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
