Airline Pilot Central Forums - Details on Delta TA

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)

- - Details on Delta TA (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/88532-details-delta-ta.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1721714)

Whoa whoa whoa, back up the truck here. You just made a huge leap in this discussion. All I was saying is that we have a current level of manning. In order to keep from having trips broken up, or OOB DHers from covering trips, manning will have to go up. The result of that will have to be less flying and a W2 cut. I guess I have adjusted my life to a certain level of flying each month, and cutting that without a corresponding increase in pay is not worth it to me in the confines of this discussion. So right there, we are going to have to get a bigger hourly pay increase than we would have otherwise to get to the same W2.

I don't want a cap. I want more money to do the flying I have become accustomed to. There is no way that you can get the kind of pay increase you are talking about having to get to both institute a cap, hire more pilots to (essentially) overstaff each category and equal the W2 I would get without all the fluff. It's just math. Remember, the pot of money is only so big, and the company doesn't care how we allocate it, right? All these things being talked about will cut the pie into more slices. A 10% increase in hourly rates and a 12% decrease in flying is a W2 paycut.

The slower upgrade argument is a thing of the past too. Any of this would be minute, and unnoticed.

Sorry, I didn't mean to scare you there. :p All I'm saying is that productivity affects both pay and QOL, and that changes in productivity can be bought or sold if we wish. In the end, I'm not sure whether the resulting gain or loss in pay rates (assuming an even exchange) is a net gain one way or the other.

SWAPA clearly decided a long time ago that they would be better off selling productivity for pay rates. As a result, their W2s have been very impressive, and they still get plenty of days off. Variances in their staffing levels affect that to a certain extent, but they seem to be generally happy with their contract structure overall.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1721691)

I highlighted your quote.

You said this:

Then you said this:

So how are you going to get them to staff properly, which would result in a requirement to have MORE pilots in category, not less?

T,
They should be manning correctly anyway, but we know they're not. Your solution (global reserve coverage) only brings us one step closer to removing the barriers between bases, thereby opening the door wider for out of base coverage of anything. Camels and tents.

Quote:

Originally Posted by scambo1 (Post 1721755)

Bingo!

About 15 years ago I was at a MCO base meeting, where the then head of Crew Resources was speaking. He said if it were up to him, there would only be ONE base, ATL, and EVERYONE would be on reserve! He also said every reserve should fly to the guarantee, since that's what they are being paid!

I raised my hand and asked, "If all the reserves are flying all the time, how will you cover irops? He said, "That's what green slips are for".

So, there you go, and ever since then we have been slowly moving in that direction (PBS was a huge manning concession).

If we allow other bases to cover in base flying, why have bases at all?

Why not just have one big base, and let everyone bid from there?

Think of all the jobs that could be eliminated. Whoo Hoo!

With that plus pay banding, can you say "stagnation"? But we'll be nearly as efficient as SW! And that's what we all want...right? :rolleyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Timbo (Post 1721761)

Someone gets it!!

Short term solutions are really long term concessions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by scambo1 (Post 1721755)

PM inbound

Here's one more thing to ponder. Those fences that come down in Jan. Guess what. There is only one fence, and with the death of the whales, it is only on one side now. No south guy will ever fly one. Ever.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1721784)

So what......

Quote:

Originally Posted by scambo1 (Post 1721801)

So what......

I guess I am saying that it is a good thing we had those fences on a more junior super premium piece of equipment just long enough or it to go away. /sarcasm. Those captains will be able to displace into a 777 in another 6 months... but not the other way around.

The rich got yet richer... as it were.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1721806)

I'm tracking, but really don't want to get into a north vs south debate. However, I would say this should be instructive to the union.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1721806)

You've been around long enough to know this business is neither fair nor predictable. It is tumultuous though.

You can let this fence injustices you speak of eat you from the inside out or move on.

I would venture to guess if you polled those you fly with that were NBC FUR, those who flushed and moved on are doing better than those that harbor and bathe the transgressions and oppression only they feel.

Look no further than TC. Let it go. Don't be a TC.