Airline Pilot Central Forums

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)

Raging white 10-02-2014 07:14 AM


Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1738552)
I think that is a lot easier said than done because it is different things to different pilots. Frankly, I'm not interested in a payrate of C2K + inflation in and of itself. I have my reasons, but I will betcha that many pilots near or above my seniority have a similar reasoning. I want that money tax sheltered.

I think folks well below that seniority level would agree with that. Fill up 401k, AND 401c to fed limits in combination with ""reasonable"* pay rate increases is a goal I could get behind, before higher pay rates with no change in retirement contribution.

* reasonable is up for debate. Fights on.

TOGA LK 10-02-2014 07:24 AM


Originally Posted by Raging white (Post 1738591)
I think folks well below that seniority level would agree with that. Fill up 401k, AND 401c to fed limits in combination with ""reasonable"* pay rate increases is a goal I could get behind, before higher pay rates with no change in retirement contribution.

* reasonable is up for debate. Fights on.

Someone gets it. 15% from DAL and 20% from you is going to land you well short after several decades. Especially if your relatives live to 100 with regularity. Some of you DTW and ATL guys, well...

scambo1 10-02-2014 09:10 AM


Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1738554)
That works for you and sailingfun.. but not for me.. or 88driver actually. And it doesn't provide any kind of average. Sorry, but it won't, because there are 11,000 different situations. So I will say this again. If you simply want to talk about restoration of payrates, that's one thing, and ya'll can argue that all day long. But that is only a small part of the equation. And I'm not saying that the figure isn't "eye opening" Never said any such thing. What I AM saying however is that it is not as simple as some here like to make it out to be.

IMO, at no point did Timbo or 88drvr ever try to put a super fine point on the lost million, they averaged it. Now you are trying to put a super fine point on it just to be argumentative. If it was a million more or less for a middle of the pack guy, it was a million for everyone...mean, median, mode who cares...noone but you argues against it.

Now for some reason you demand some scientific analysis...demand it from your effing union, you know the leverageless, no strategic goal, collective bargaining agent.

OldFlyGuy 10-02-2014 09:57 AM


Originally Posted by TOGA LK (Post 1738600)
Someone gets it. 15% from DAL and 20% from you is going to land you well short after several decades. Especially if your relatives live to 100 with regularity. Some of you DTW and ATL guys, well...

I don't understand this 15% + 20% statement at all. What are you trying to say? Re: the we all gave a million argument. I agree and it seems like a fair average. We gave up a lot. Furloughed folks lost 100% for a while. Shareholders lost 100%. I'm not sure we had many alternatives. What I don't understand is how that is an argument or leverage. 1) management already knows what we gave up and 2) they don't care. Neither does the BoD, the NMB, any Judge, Mediator or Arbitrator or PEB member. We care, but they don't. Telling them what they already know and don't care about is like talking to my cat. We will probably have to throw a shoe at some point. IMO. OFG

Scoop 10-02-2014 10:07 AM


Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1738554)
That works for you and sailingfun.. but not for me.. or 88driver actually. And it doesn't provide any kind of average. Sorry, but it won't, because there are 11,000 different situations. So I will say this again. If you simply want to talk about restoration of payrates, that's one thing, and ya'll can argue that all day long. But that is only a small part of the equation. And I'm not saying that the figure isn't "eye opening" Never said any such thing. What I AM saying however is that it is not as simple as some here like to make it out to be.



I think 100K a year as an average might be a little bit high, but not by much. My guess would be between 75 and 100K.

However there is really no reason to guess as this information is readily available and I sure hope the NC guys have it. Divide total Pilot costs in 2004/total Pilots. That will give you an average for that year. Do the same for the following years and bingo you can get your answer.

Scoop

tsquare 10-02-2014 10:25 AM


Originally Posted by scambo1 (Post 1738691)
IMO, at no point did Timbo or 88drvr ever try to put a super fine point on the lost million, they averaged it. Now you are trying to put a super fine point on it just to be argumentative. If it was a million more or less for a middle of the pack guy, it was a million for everyone...mean, median, mode who cares...noone but you argues against it.

Now for some reason you demand some scientific analysis...demand it from your effing union, you know the leverageless, no strategic goal, collective bargaining agent.

Back off a little. I am not making any argument just to be argumentative. I truly do not believe it is as simple as some are trying to make it out to be, and I certainly don't think it a legitimate basis upon which to make demands for "restoration". There are 11000+ different scenarios. By using an average, we might very well be selling ourselves short. When I did my LBP analysis, the 7ER was the lion's share of a 30 year career pay wise based on zero (airline) growth and upgrading at the soonest possibility. Now that is trending downward and we all know why. Just something to think about, and I didn't say that just to make the bigger pays more is retarded argument. But what I am saying is that since bigger does pay more, and we want restoration based on equipment size, the company might not have to shell out as much to completely restore career earnings potential.

Free Bird 10-02-2014 10:28 AM


Originally Posted by Scoop (Post 1738733)
However there is really no reason to guess as this information is readily available and I sure hope the NC guys have it. Divide total Pilot costs in 2004/total Pilots. That will give you an average for that year. Do the same for the following years and bingo you can get your answer.

Scoop

Excellent idea Scoop. Would the pilot cost numbers not be publicly available via the companies financials?

tsquare 10-02-2014 10:35 AM


Originally Posted by Free Bird (Post 1738743)
Excellent idea Scoop. Would the pilot cost numbers not be publicly available via the companies financials?

To my knowledge, those numbers are not broken out by individual employee groups

Purple Drank 10-02-2014 11:35 AM


Originally Posted by Timbo (Post 1737736)
From Oberon's post above;

"Here's our main difference of opinion. You think your (or my) estimation of our value has some relevance in our negotiations and I think it's mostly irrelevant (there is a place for rhetoric if/when the company isn't cooperating to rally the groups leading up to a strike vote). We will get what we can negotiate which is determined by the leverage we have or can generate. Historical pay rates aren't leverage."

And he wasn't even working for Delta until a few months ago...

Sounds like Oberon has accepted the bankruptcy pay rates as a reset.

That's how I read it, too. I take it from Oberon's failure to respond to your post that he's happy to accept bankruptcy rates as his baseline.

DAL 88 Driver 10-02-2014 11:42 AM


Originally Posted by Purple Drank (Post 1738784)
That's how I read it, too. I take it from Oberon's failure to respond to your post that he's happy to accept bankruptcy rates as his baseline.

That's all he's known since he's been in the industry. And he thinks history is irrelevant. I don't even know where to start with that. :eek:


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:31 PM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands