Details on Delta TA
08-06-2014, 08:57 AM
#401
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,108
Originally Posted by alfaromeo
There is no difference in our goals; we all want the same thing, more money, more time off, more benefits, the whole package. Despite the lame webboard arguments to the contrary, there is not one pilot involved in negotiating our contract that does benefit from all those things. Their interests are directly aligned, they have no reason to accept anything less than the maximum available amount of money. Any argument to the contrary is just made up crap.
The only difference is the path to get there. You believe in the emotional side of the argument. Your idea is that the only thing we lack is the will to get the job done. If you create these emotional propaganda based arguments like executive compensation, you can generate massive contractual gains through sheer will of effort. For you, any contractual shortfalls are merely a lack of concentration and effort. So you create these emotional arguments based on what we made a decade ago, or what management is making, or you use conflated statistics to try to get your way.
An example is your claim that pay banding will cost 1,000 jobs. In order to save 1,000 jobs, you would have to have at least 1,000 pilots in training per month, meaning that every pilot on the seniority list would have to go through training each year. If you assume that pay banding would save half the training slots, an aggressive assumption, you would be saying that Delta manages 24,000 training events per year, or each pilot goes through upgrade school every 6 months. If that argument were brought forth to anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of our careers, you will be laughed out of the room. Same as your claim that $86,000 per year compensation increase is nothing.
My view is simple. Our contract will be based on economics. That is how the company views it and more importantly that is how the NMB views it. They talk about the zone of reasonableness and what they mean is use economics to justify your position,not emotion. Emotionalism gets you parked for years and years. There is a reason I can't buy a new Mercedes for $100 and a reason why I can't buy an apartment in Manhattan for $1,000. It is all economics. No matter how much emotional propaganda I spit out, I can't close a deal on those terms.
On that chart above, I asked you to look at all the zeros on the left side of the chart. That is the result of pilot groups negotiating from emotion and not economics. History has shown that my way of looking at things has succeeded where others failed using your way. I know that many believe that if they just use the emotional method but just become more emotional, then it will work. It doesn't. The rest of the piloting industry has come to the Delta way of thinking. Look at how the APA is now dealing with their JCBA. No threats to meet them at the fiery gates of hell, just an economic analysis of the state of their company and the state of their contract in relation to the rest of the industry. This is the path to success.
I know the big joke is about the time value of money, but it is not a joke. Look below at how hard it is to catch up if you blow two years of negotiating. Even I could make a touchdown in the NFL if they put me at the one yard line and put the defense back at the 50.
The only difference is the path to get there. You believe in the emotional side of the argument. Your idea is that the only thing we lack is the will to get the job done. If you create these emotional propaganda based arguments like executive compensation, you can generate massive contractual gains through sheer will of effort. For you, any contractual shortfalls are merely a lack of concentration and effort. So you create these emotional arguments based on what we made a decade ago, or what management is making, or you use conflated statistics to try to get your way.
An example is your claim that pay banding will cost 1,000 jobs. In order to save 1,000 jobs, you would have to have at least 1,000 pilots in training per month, meaning that every pilot on the seniority list would have to go through training each year. If you assume that pay banding would save half the training slots, an aggressive assumption, you would be saying that Delta manages 24,000 training events per year, or each pilot goes through upgrade school every 6 months. If that argument were brought forth to anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of our careers, you will be laughed out of the room. Same as your claim that $86,000 per year compensation increase is nothing.
My view is simple. Our contract will be based on economics. That is how the company views it and more importantly that is how the NMB views it. They talk about the zone of reasonableness and what they mean is use economics to justify your position,not emotion. Emotionalism gets you parked for years and years. There is a reason I can't buy a new Mercedes for $100 and a reason why I can't buy an apartment in Manhattan for $1,000. It is all economics. No matter how much emotional propaganda I spit out, I can't close a deal on those terms.
On that chart above, I asked you to look at all the zeros on the left side of the chart. That is the result of pilot groups negotiating from emotion and not economics. History has shown that my way of looking at things has succeeded where others failed using your way. I know that many believe that if they just use the emotional method but just become more emotional, then it will work. It doesn't. The rest of the piloting industry has come to the Delta way of thinking. Look at how the APA is now dealing with their JCBA. No threats to meet them at the fiery gates of hell, just an economic analysis of the state of their company and the state of their contract in relation to the rest of the industry. This is the path to success.
I know the big joke is about the time value of money, but it is not a joke. Look below at how hard it is to catch up if you blow two years of negotiating. Even I could make a touchdown in the NFL if they put me at the one yard line and put the defense back at the 50.
Did we leave money on the table in C2012?
Were we duped by management?
Were all the extra concessions necessary during record profts?
You have good intentions, but you are out of your league.
We are on the fast track to another cost neutral concessionary deal.
You and your friends are in control again.
I cant wait to be wrong.
Jerry
08-06-2014, 09:41 AM
#402
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by gzsg
Alpha
Did we leave money on the table in C2012?
Were we duped by management?
Were all the extra concessions necessary during record profts?
You have good intentions, but you are out of your league.
We are on the fast track to another cost neutral concessionary deal.
You and your friends are in control again.
I cant wait to be wrong.
Jerry
Did we leave money on the table in C2012?
Were we duped by management?
Were all the extra concessions necessary during record profts?
You have good intentions, but you are out of your league.
We are on the fast track to another cost neutral concessionary deal.
You and your friends are in control again.
I cant wait to be wrong.
Jerry
He was exactly right Jerry, you bring nothing to the discussion but raw unfettered emotion. He presents clear mathematical facts, and you totally ignore them. You use words like "duped", and phrases like "leave money on the table", yet refuse to acknowledge that we do not operate in a vacuum and what the other groups are getting DO matter. They are behind in CAREER earnings Jerry. I don't care how much they got in their last contracts. Your position is completely worthless to me and to the pilot group as a whole. But keep on with it, it looks more ridiculous with each post.
You already are wrong.
08-06-2014, 09:54 AM
#403
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by DAL 88 Driver
That's slick, Alfa. Really slick.
So I guess your assumption is that we all retire at the end of 2017? Did you notice where your "average" rate is at that point in the comparison? (More importantly, did you think we wouldn't notice?)
So (for those of you in Rio Linda/Herndon)... notice that the rate in the "2 yr past amendable" example ends up at $254.22, while the rate in the C2012 example ends up at $206.50. That's going to make a difference in 2018 of almost $50 per hour, and then again in 2019 and so forth and so forth (unless something else is negotiated for those years). Plus, in terms of strategy, the "2 yr past amendable" example you gave also establishes that we are actually working and intend to restore our pay, not establish "reasonable" improvements to unreasonable bankruptcy related pay cuts as the new norm.
I sure hope our MEC is not listening to you!
So I guess your assumption is that we all retire at the end of 2017? Did you notice where your "average" rate is at that point in the comparison? (More importantly, did you think we wouldn't notice?)
So (for those of you in Rio Linda/Herndon)... notice that the rate in the "2 yr past amendable" example ends up at $254.22, while the rate in the C2012 example ends up at $206.50. That's going to make a difference in 2018 of almost $50 per hour, and then again in 2019 and so forth and so forth (unless something else is negotiated for those years). Plus, in terms of strategy, the "2 yr past amendable" example you gave also establishes that we are actually working and intend to restore our pay, not establish "reasonable" improvements to unreasonable bankruptcy related pay cuts as the new norm.
I sure hope our MEC is not listening to you!
More money = Time * money * ROR, and even 5% is much much much better than zero. And in case you didn't know, we aren't going to live forever. I don't want to wait for C2K + inflation (which gets bigger and bigger with each passing day that we stand with arms folded waiting for that glorious payday
).Oh, and I am sure to placate you he could easily run them out to 2050 to show you even more how ludicrous the waiting game would be. How long do you estimate it will take if we hold fast to a C2K + inflation pay rate before we actually get those rates? If that is not your ultimate goal, then you are blowing a lot of smoke here, because that is what you keep harping on. If you are willing to accept something less on the upcoming contract, what is that number? If it absolutely must be C2K + inflation, how long are you willing to wait to achieve that goal? And please... don't deflect the discussion with the "but dALPA isn't even acknowledging that we have sacrificed, stated any goals, etc etc etc..." Just tell me how long you are willing to go without any pay increase to achieve your goals.
08-06-2014, 10:22 AM
#404
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
Originally Posted by tsquare
Interesting. Did you really look at that chart? I mean really look at it? In order to get to those pay rates you are so enamored with, you would actually take a $1000+ hit on earnings. Is that what you really want? Look at them again, and tell me where the curves cross where it is worthwhile for us to fold arms akimbo and then get higher rates. You will have to do some research, but you also have to factor in what you will be losing in the private sector investment market. I don't know about you, but up until July, my portfolio was doing rather well. I don't want to lose the increased contributions that I can be making just to make a point. So why is it so important to you to swing for the fence on every pitch? It still makes no sense to me being the investment guy that you are that you still believe swinging for homeruns is the way to go. Barry Bonds is worthless to us. I want Pete Rose.
More money = Time * money * ROR, and even 5% is much much much better than zero. And in case you didn't know, we aren't going to live forever. I don't want to wait for C2K + inflation (which gets bigger and bigger with each passing day that we stand with arms folded waiting for that glorious payday).
Oh, and I am sure to placate you he could easily run them out to 2050 to show you even more how ludicrous the waiting game would be.
More money = Time * money * ROR, and even 5% is much much much better than zero. And in case you didn't know, we aren't going to live forever. I don't want to wait for C2K + inflation (which gets bigger and bigger with each passing day that we stand with arms folded waiting for that glorious payday
).Oh, and I am sure to placate you he could easily run them out to 2050 to show you even more how ludicrous the waiting game would be.
I have never said that we should "fold arms" or play a waiting game "swinging for the fences." That's the kind of straw man you and a few others like to build to try and make my position seem extreme and unreasonable.
What I have said (clearly and multiple times) is that we should define our objective as restoring our profession and our careers. Now, that might ruffle some feathers... especially now that we've spent a full decade setting expectations by acting like we're fine with bankruptcy as a reset. But if restoration is the goal, we are extremely unlikely to obtain it (or even anything remotely close to it) if we don't articulate it and don't build our plan around it.
That's the difference between me and Alfa (and I guess you too). I believe restoration is possible. Not easy by any means, but possible. Alfa wrote it off a long time ago as being "unreasonable." He offers proof as being our results to date. Yet we haven't even tried. Of course, this is the point where you will talk about what other pilot groups have tried and accomplished. The thing is, T... those other pilot groups have been in a very different situation than what we've had here at Delta. Our company is by far the most successful and has made the most progress towards restructuring for future success of any of the other formerly bankrupt airlines. Our pilot group has been in a position of leadership among pilot groups in our industry. Yet we've squandered the opportunity and really hamstrung everybody else by in effect accepting bankruptcy as a reset and redefining the value of our profession based on that new baseline. We're hanging our hat on "pattern bargaining" and then setting a low bar for everyone else to pattern off of.
I realize you're going to argue with me til the cows come home. I don't understand why, but then again I don't have to understand and, honestly, I don't really care. Maybe you're far enough along in your career that you don't want to rock the boat. Management will fight tooth and nail to prevent the kind of pilot cost increases that restoration would involve. They thought they had that dragon slayed a long time ago, never to be revisited. Maybe you don't really care that much about this profession and you just don't want to rock the boat so you can coast on in to retirement. I can understand the thought process there. We all have to do what we think best for ourselves and our families. I just have a hard time understanding how someone (especially someone who should know better) could think what we do is so much less valuable today than it was for decades.
I get it with Alfa. He's strictly a numbers guy... a bean counter. If it can't be quantified, it doesn't exist. If guys who thought like that had been in charge in the 1960's, we certainly never would have gone to the moon. I guess maybe you're more like Alfa than me.
08-06-2014, 10:35 AM
#405
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Are you seriously saying that it is OUR fault that none of the other carriers achieved appreciably more than us? Really? WE hamstrung THEM??????? Good Lord I thought I heard it all. NOBODY has done anything of note. Nobody. And that is our fault.
Set goals, make statements... yada yada yada. I want action, not talk. The newbies are getting 15% retirement and they don't have to do a damned thing other than breathe. That is better than you and I will ever have done. To say that I don't care is ludicrous. But I cannot worry about a newhire that won't retire for 30 years that already has a projection far better than mine...
Set goals, make statements... yada yada yada. I want action, not talk. The newbies are getting 15% retirement and they don't have to do a damned thing other than breathe. That is better than you and I will ever have done. To say that I don't care is ludicrous. But I cannot worry about a newhire that won't retire for 30 years that already has a projection far better than mine...
08-06-2014, 10:57 AM
#406
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: right for a long, long time
Posts: 2,642
Originally Posted by alfaromeo
Originally Posted by DAL 88 Driver
That's slick, Alfa. Really slick.
So I guess your assumption is that we all retire at the end of 2017? Did you notice where your "average" rate is at that point in the comparison? (More importantly, did you think we wouldn't notice?)
So (for those of you in Rio Linda/Herndon)... notice that the rate in the "2 yr past amendable" example ends up at $254.22, while the rate in the C2012 example ends up at $206.50. That's going to make a difference in 2018 of almost $50 per hour, and then again in 2019 and so forth and so forth (unless something else is negotiated for those years).
So I guess your assumption is that we all retire at the end of 2017? Did you notice where your "average" rate is at that point in the comparison? (More importantly, did you think we wouldn't notice?)
So (for those of you in Rio Linda/Herndon)... notice that the rate in the "2 yr past amendable" example ends up at $254.22, while the rate in the C2012 example ends up at $206.50. That's going to make a difference in 2018 of almost $50 per hour, and then again in 2019 and so forth and so forth (unless something else is negotiated for those years).
Originally Posted by pilotjockey
that chart up put out basically says that 4/8/3/3 and two years of nothing is more money than two years of nothing followed by 13.8/13.8/13.8 thats interesting, but in 2017 we would be $40 hour shy on method one and would need a 23% increase to catch up to method two. oh and thanks to the suggestion for the webinar from whoever, i did the 1100 one just now and it was informative, the new alpos seem to have high standards and be willing to listen and respond for a change lets just hope its not window dressing
*Disclaimer... This is purely hypothetical... Who knows what will happen next spring, it'll be better if every pilot is unified behind the Negotiating Committee....
08-06-2014, 11:02 AM
#407
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: right for a long, long time
Posts: 2,642
What about with a just a little more green, not much.... I still think we will do better if we are unified, but this is academic anyway...
sorry for the blue box... it doesn't highlight anything
I don't know about y'all, but I'm crediting a lot more than 1000 hours per year, and I am not working more. Add in some contract items where it adds hours like training/vaca/CBT and 5:15 ADG hasn't kicked in yet, and now the number gets bigger outside of the rate.
sorry for the blue box... it doesn't highlight anything
I don't know about y'all, but I'm crediting a lot more than 1000 hours per year, and I am not working more. Add in some contract items where it adds hours like training/vaca/CBT and 5:15 ADG hasn't kicked in yet, and now the number gets bigger outside of the rate.
08-06-2014, 11:37 AM
#408
On Reserve
Joined APC: Jul 2014
Posts: 14
Originally Posted by shiznit
What about with a just a little more green, not much.... I still think we will do better if we are unified, but this is academic anyway...
5:15 ADG hasn't kicked in yet, and now the number gets bigger outside of the rate.
5:15 ADG hasn't kicked in yet, and now the number gets bigger outside of the rate.
How much of your credit was from FPL?
08-06-2014, 12:20 PM
#409
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,619
Originally Posted by gzsg
Alpha
Did we leave money on the table in C2012?
Were we duped by management?
Were all the extra concessions necessary during record profts?
You have good intentions, but you are out of your league.
We are on the fast track to another cost neutral concessionary deal.
You and your friends are in control again.
I cant wait to be wrong.
Jerry
Did we leave money on the table in C2012?
Were we duped by management?
Were all the extra concessions necessary during record profts?
You have good intentions, but you are out of your league.
We are on the fast track to another cost neutral concessionary deal.
You and your friends are in control again.
I cant wait to be wrong.
Jerry
Look I understand your point of view, you think you are tough and I am weak and all you need to do is conduct a character assassination on me and then all will be well. I have seen this type of behavior many times before.
I will tell you my point of view. I think you are the weak one because you succumb to your emotionalism and self pity. If enough pilots and/or MEC Reps do the same thing then we will be in bad shape. There is a giant pot of money out there that we can dip into and get an on time industry leading contract. To get to that goal we have to bargain realistically and deal with the company's issues just like we want them to deal with our issues. To get to that goal we have to push as hard as we can but we have to realize that pigs get fed and hogs get slaughtered.
I think you and the people who give into their self pity are just weak and narcissistic. You would rather spend years and years getting nothing while bleating around about how tough you are and bad your life is. I want money and I want it now and I want more later. Short of taking some hostages, the only way to accomplish that is to bargain hard but realistically. You can only fool yourself for so long and then world crashes down around you.
So keep telling yourself our last contract was some failure. Go find any economist or accountant anywhere in the world to look at the costing data and come up with a conclusion of cost neutral. Your claim that it was neutral is pure insanity and in a real negotiation with real adults it would make you look the fool. But if it makes you happy to feel sorry for yourself then go ahead.
Management didn't dupe us one bit in the last negotiation. That negotiation was based on a successful company that wanted to save money by re-fleeting. We were the key to that re-fleeting and we negotiated to allow them to do it because we cashed in on some of the savings and are adding pilots to mainline. Every month, more guys are upgrading and we are hiring more pilots. That is exactly what they promised us and they have delivered. I know you would like more. I would like more, everyone wants more. Since then we have completed several LOA's that all provided more benefits. We have a great shot at getting more in this next deal, it is ours to lose.
So you keep trying to jump up to the top of the mountain in one leap and will keep climbing the hill one step at a time. Let's see who gets there first.
08-06-2014, 12:40 PM
#410
ready for mo money
Joined APC: May 2013
Position: Left Behind
Posts: 84
Originally Posted by shiznit
I think we will do WAY better and we deserve much more, but here's what another early 4/8.5/3/3 would look like using the Alfa format:
*Disclaimer... This is purely hypothetical... Who knows what will happen next spring, it'll be better if every pilot is unified behind the Negotiating Committee....
*Disclaimer... This is purely hypothetical... Who knows what will happen next spring, it'll be better if every pilot is unified behind the Negotiating Committee....
the webinar thing was a ray of hope but im not convinced even tho they mentioned my question live. however until alpo actually delivers its all talk.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
