wow. nicely played. :rolleyes:

That's correct. But I don't think even you would make the claim that makes us the industry leader in Section 3.

That wasn't in the contract comparison Karnak, so we'd both be guessing. I'd guess it was a FedEx or Southwest guy.

Here's the note that Karnak thinks I've ignored. For Southwest, ADG says: "5:39**". In the notes column right next to it, the note says: "**Based on 6.5 TFP's". Southwest has an ADG of 5:39 while Delta has an ADG of 5:15. That's why I said Southwest has a higher ADG than Delta.

Spin all you like Karnak, it doesn't change the facts.

Again, I didn't get my data from you, I got my data from the DALPA contract comparison.

Crew augmentation is only one aspect of work rules. We lead in that aspect, but lag in all the others. Southwest and UPS lead in Work Rules. Leading in one paragraph of an entire section does not make you the industry leader in that section.

Carl

You and Karnak can use whatever you like. The problem you have is showing everyone your data rather than your opinions. I'm using the DALPA contract comparison while you, Karnak and the others seem to be running from it.

Delta pilots don't lead the industry in one single section of the contract. Not one. Source: DALPA contract comparison.

Carl

No, that's not what I said at all. Here it is again:

Carl

Doesn't that make our profit sharing payout at risk and variable since "there's no way to determine next year's profit sharing cost because we don't know what the profit will be...or if they'll be one."

It makes it variable.

"At Risk" is a DALPA sponsored term designed to diminish profit sharing in the eyes of pilots so pilots won't miss it when DALPA gives part of it up to self fund pay rate increases.

Carl

Nick Faldo once famously won a British Open with 18 consecutive pars on the last day of the tournament. Using your logic (which I dispute) the win must not have meant much because "He didn't have the best score on any of the holes, not one."

I'll take our contract right now before any other group's. It only gets better going forward.

Not sexy enough for some unfortunately, but I am right there with ya.

OK, lets say that Spackle has won the issue on PS. PS is variable compensation, but only to the upside since there is no "at risk" element. LOL! Hang with me here... if PS was to go down due to a drop off in profitability... I know, I know, it never will, the pilots will be good with that. Certainly good enough that they would never chose to monetize at a higher rate. Therefore we elect to retain full current exposure to PS.

Further, RA will never account for future risk exposure to PS because it cannot be calculated. Even if it was possible, the NMB would tell him he is full of it and would slap him down. He will just have to the roll the dice and hope it all works out.

So, what is the most we will get from him in this situation, assuming all else remains the same and we've reduced the money making sections to annual pay rate increases.? I know, I know, RA does not have a maximum because it is not he who decides our max compensation, it is us (according to Spackler). Lets make it easy and assume a 3 year contract. I think it would be helpful if we further assume two scenarios: 1) a contract delivered at the amenable date, and 2) contract delivered at some point beyond the amenable date. In scenario 2, lets include a date along with the pay raises expected.

So this exercise is not about what we want, I want quite a bit (I know, I know, what we get is defined by what we want because it is us that determines the max.) So lets assume that we all want $10,000 per hour. This exercise is about what is doable, and specifically doable within a defined timeframe and within historical processes.

I'll start.

1) on time: 8, 3, 3

He will meet AA's rates plus 1% and then maintain that margin in the out years. His thinking (Spackler's as well) is that PS is variable but certainly not at risk (our risk), and our pay margin in reality will be 17% with PS. I know, I know, we just have to say stuff it and those rates will climb because he cannot cap them. He will think a 17% margin is fair and he'll guess that the NMB will agree. I know, I know, the NMB will refuse to count PS. It isn't the 17% margin that he thinks the NMB will sign off on, it is the 1% margin.

2) 11, 3, 3 delivered at amendable date plus 18 months. After watching PS decline slightly in 2015, the early look at 2016 PS shows a further decline. RA is comfortable raising the stakes a bit with a reduced PS liability. The margin is now 4%. The NMB has no heartburn with industry standard plus 4%. Delta pilots are eager to get the meter running again.

Ok, let the Poo fly! But, lets not forget to play. Don't forget your projections!

Reference ^^