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 LeineLodge (Post 1728927)

Yes. We've been over this, but I still think it was a good enough deal, that positioned us for where we are today, and on our current timeline.

Does voting yes on C2012 make me the enemy? Is anyone who disagrees with DPA the enemy?

I STRONGLY suggest you guys think hard about what you'd like to accomplish and find a constructive way to get there.

All I'm hearing from Jerry is what we can't let happen. Not what we must achieve. He's trying to play defense against the wrong opponent. Unless of course you guys are convinced that your fellow Delta pilots (me) are the enemy.

I don't think I've ever called any of my fellow pilots "the enemy." Don't confuse me with anyone else.

What I am suggesting is that the same rationale used by DALPA to justify C2012 could be (most likely will be?) used again for C2015. Take a look at Lee Moak's comments in the Bloomberg/Business Week article. And then take a look at the lack of any retraction/clarification from Moak, or even any concern voiced by our DALPA leadership about this. I know when I emailed my reps about it, they actually SUPPORTED what he said! :eek:

From what I've seen, you are a very vocal supporter of everything DALPA on this board. I do hope you meant what you said about your expectations for C2015. But based on your track record of posting here, I have my doubts that when it comes down to it you will do anything other than vote YES to whatever they come up with, no matter how weak it is. PLEASE prove me wrong. I would love that!

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeineLodge (Post 1728918)

Can you clarify for me exactly who you/DPA think the enemy is?

I'm a Delta pilot, that supports ALPA, and is personally:

1. For keeping our profit sharing the same
2. Against SDP's unless the restrictions are so tight that the company wouldn't want them anyways (1.5 hour block max each way NOT waiveable by DALPA, 8 hours block in to block out NOT reducible, pays 10:30 pay AND credit since it's 2 days, etc)
3. Is expecting Delta pilots to share in the wildly profitable upside the company is enjoying right now. Profitability that we facilitate 24/7/365

Am I the enemy? :eek:

Not the enemy,but how can someone take you seriously when you say you want number 1 and 3,but did not vote to obtain those goals in the present contract?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DAL 88 Driver (Post 1728921)

What are we, in kindergarten? :rolleyes:

I know Carl. I think very highly of him. Haven't read everything he's ever posted here but have never seen anything from him that was a lie. He has a different opinion from yours on a whole host of issues, but I'm not aware of any "lies" he has told.

So why don't you post a few examples, T? You know... put up or shut up? ;)

Of course you aren't aware, because you buy into them. Besides, why do I have to "prove" anything? Carl makes up stuff all the time, you know it, yet you accept as if it were handed down on golden tablets. You never demand he prove anything. I'm not interested in getting into a research project on this. Carl makes stuff up, and the powdered sugar crowd believes it. I suggest a nice bold blend to go with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tim123 (Post 1728943)

Not the enemy,but how can someone take you seriously when you say you want number 1 and 3,but did not vote to obtain those goals in the present contract?

So in other words, if there is ANYTHING that you don't agree with in the highly complex documents that make up our contract, one should have voted no?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gzsg (Post 1728843)

DPA was kind enough to provide us with this chart that DALPA wants no pilot to see. Please make copies and post in all our bases. Many pilots have no idea how far we have fallen.

What chart?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sink r8 (Post 1728859)

If individual Delta pilots are going to bet on someone to do the right thing, I submit they'd better bet on themselves, and start by taking an activist role in supervising the union.

Or in volunteering to do more than just supervise. ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 1727652)

I think he is saying new hire pilots at Endeavor get hotel rooms. As opposed to new hire pilots at Delta who used to work at Endeavor.

Ah, yeah I guess. And I suppose I see the superficial irony on a technical level. But take a full and fair look at the first year at PCL and DL and, well, come on.

I'm in favor of rooms for new hires and said so on the survey. But first year pay and "training pay" is still fairly good when you zoom out and look at everything. They could easily have previously agreed to transfer the cost of hotels by reducing pay the first year by the same amount and no one would notice. Its still the right thing to do IMO, and I hope it happens.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeineLodge (Post 1728918)

No.

The enemy is anyone who does not want our pilots to see the 2004 hourly rates plis inflarion chart.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 1728299)

My angle is rational thought. I enjoy fact based debate. "Restoration" seems like an irrational objective. Not because it is too high but because it's based on nothing a mediator is likely to consider during negotiations. It's a desperate argument in a situation that doesn't require it.

I see what you are saying on some level. We can't just go into the NMB and squeal "RESTORATION!" and point to a high water mark and say we will "shut 'er down!" unless we get it because we "deserve" it and expect anything other than getting parked by an activist NMB. I get that, really.

But there is a place for pointing it out. I'd actually advocate that we don't lead with it, but put the bait in a trap we know the management is going to step right into no matter what. We know they are going to play Bolshevik's advocate and say we can't have anything they can't afford to give to every single work group, ME-TOO!, blah blah blah. When they do that, especially with Section 3, and they will, we simply point out what work groups are below, at or above pre BK pay. Boom. #thatjusthappened

There may even be a place, possibly in a well crafted opener, where we bring up high water mark pay, plus inflation since, and post the rates just for visualization. Then compare profits then and profits now, and then quickly "negotiate down" to around the high water mark rates plus a little extra, and suddenly we look much more reasonable. Then they say productivity, we say irrational fleet diversity is responsibile for any cost variation on our part, and not only is it unreasonable for us to be expected to pay for what is 100% their choice and desire, we actually, by their own admission, get a significant network/revenue benefit from the very thing that primarily causes it.

Its all a big chess game about making your position look more "reasonable" while showing you can move to the middle a bit. Chest thumping from day one is an automatic loser. But there are ways to accomplish the same thing more effectively. Its all in the delivery.