alfaromeo

I guess that now we have officially abandoned the cost neutral argument. The numbers are just overwhelming. I helped prepare the costing sheets but they belong to the MEC and not to me. If the MEC wants to release them they can but I can't. Certainly you understand that when you produce a work product for an organization, it belongs to them and not to you.

The funny part is I can post the spreadsheet or I can tell what the result is. Apparently you will believe the spreadsheet but not what I tell you. In fact, if I posted the spreadsheet you would just claim they were made up numbers anyway. The grand total is just north of $1.012 billion.

The facts are that we got a 19.5% increase in total cash compensation and that includes the full hit on profit sharing. The only other concessions were manpower concessions, and the graph of pilots required shows the manpower required by the CONTRACT and thus it is the only relevant measure of what those concessions mean. The total hit was around 100-150 pilots with an mean of 125 based on average conditions. That blip is shown in the summer of 2013. After that blip, the steady rise in pilots required reflect the major shift in flying from regionals to mainline; that shift was the sine qua non of the entire deal in 2012 and that has been delivered more than promised in the ratification materials.

Without showing some more evidence of manpower reductions, there are no other mysterious concessions to offset that 19.5% increase in cash compensation. You can't just say "concessions offset the pay" without pointing out what the concessions were or showing how those concessions have resulted in fewer pilots required by our contract.

The company saved some money from RJ maintenance, some on RJ contracts, some with increased revenue from passengers flying on two class aircraft instead of 50 seaters. None of that money came from Delta pilot's pockets and instead ended up in our pockets. I seriously don't care what sources of revenue/cost savings they find elsewhere in their cost structure. The money is green and spends just the same wherever it came from.

The bottom line: 19.5% cash compensation; numerous work rule improvements; better vacation; more mainline flying. That is the net effect of that contract. May not be enough for you but the numbers are the numbers. It was not cost neutral for pilots, not even close, the end state is plus $400 million. The rest of this argument is just noise.

DAL 88 Driver

Yet even after all that, our current pay rates are approximately 34% below the buying power we had with our pay rates throughout most of the 1980's, 1990's, and early 2000's. I guess if you accept bankruptcy as the new baseline, then 19.5% is really good. Trying to recover from a 42% pay cut... not so much.

DAL 88 Driver

It's a shame that it's come to this point, but literally thousands of your fellow pilots have such distrust of "our union" that we feel we need results of a contract survey to verify whether it was followed or not. The mere fact that so many of us believe we should be working to restore our profession and our careers is reason enough to believe that 4833 wasn't even remotely close to what the survey indicated.

If DALPA was truly running things as a "bottom up" organization and properly utilizing pilot input, then releasing those survey results would put the issue to bed once and for all. With such a major credibility problem, I don't see why in the world they wouldn't release them now (long after C2012 was negotiated and in effect). The fact that they won't gives us even more reason to doubt that they followed the input received and just makes the distrust more profound.

DAL 88 Driver

This is an excellent point. Chances are we would get cherry-picked data presented in a way to lead us to the conclusion THEY want us to reach, just like we did with C2012.

But if we're to the point that we have to hire an outside party to audit and verify what DALPA is doing... which by extension means we don't trust DALPA... then tell me again why we accept representation like that in the first place? If I had someone representing me (like say, a lawyer or something) and I reached the conclusion that I couldn't trust them anymore, I would fire their @ss and replace them with someone I could trust. I wouldn't be wasting time and money on having someone else look over their shoulder. No trust? No deal... I simply don't do business with you.

scambo1

4833, more big rjs, loss of some profit sharing...

johnso29

That still doesn't prove his claim.

DAL 88 Driver

And it also doesn't disprove what most of us instinctively know and the conversations we've had with other pilots we've known and flown with.

Just to reiterate... the only reason there isn't any "proof" is because DALPA refuses to show us the survey results. It's either going to prove you right or it's going to prove me right. My money is on me.

johnso29

How so you make such statements? Literally thousands of my fellow pilots? How do you know?

johnso29

Does that include the "thousands" of pilots you've personally spoken to?

DAL 88 Driver

Since you like data so much...



Not all, but I'll bet there are at least a couple thousand in that number who fall into the category of what I was talking about.