Details on Delta TA
05-30-2015 | 09:29 PM
#5191
Da Hudge
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
Concessions needed for it? nah... but it's time to lock it in.
05-30-2015 | 10:14 PM
#5192
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Delta C2015
Fixed your statement....
Not if we keep writing more outsourced jumbo RJ's into these TA's every 3 or 4 years. Let's hold the line for once. I understand many of those crafting these TA's are looking after their own seniority situation and don't mind horse trading larger RJ's keeping the divisive outsourced RJ dream of Leo alive. It's unnecessary and short sighted. Let's do something good for the industry.
Gloopy suggested creating a timeline to sunset outsourced flying. This is the correct way to go. Fight scope on the top and bottom end. It creates solidarity. We write letters to our government leaders to fend off the middle east carriers while we let our union take us down the primrose path of further scope creep that harms all Delta pilots. It's the definition of insanity.
Not if we keep writing more outsourced jumbo RJ's into these TA's every 3 or 4 years. Let's hold the line for once. I understand many of those crafting these TA's are looking after their own seniority situation and don't mind horse trading larger RJ's keeping the divisive outsourced RJ dream of Leo alive. It's unnecessary and short sighted. Let's do something good for the industry.
Gloopy suggested creating a timeline to sunset outsourced flying. This is the correct way to go. Fight scope on the top and bottom end. It creates solidarity. We write letters to our government leaders to fend off the middle east carriers while we let our union take us down the primrose path of further scope creep that harms all Delta pilots. It's the definition of insanity.
Delta doesn't need anymore long term debt, contracts or leases associated with 76 seat jets. We are in this for the long haul, managers pump the stock and retire.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
05-30-2015 | 10:15 PM
#5193
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Exactly. And clean up the Alaska Marketing Agreement before that resurfaces with Bastian at the helm.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
05-31-2015 | 02:39 AM
#5194
Racketeer
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 13,327
Likes: 818
From: N60.4858 W149.9327
A + b = c
C2Kpayrates.jpg
Is this too much to ask?
Can we restore this pay scale on the date of signing? The answer requires two pieces of information. In this vacuum of information I will try to explain how we get there. Some of the information I will reference is not public but every Delta pilot has access to it. I would like this to be a fact based argument that can be logically presented to any Delta pilot so your scrutiny is very welcome.
A - the cost of the increase in pay rates
B - can they be palatable enough to management to be accepted
Is this too much to ask?
Can we restore this pay scale on the date of signing? The answer requires two pieces of information. In this vacuum of information I will try to explain how we get there. Some of the information I will reference is not public but every Delta pilot has access to it. I would like this to be a fact based argument that can be logically presented to any Delta pilot so your scrutiny is very welcome.
A - the cost of the increase in pay rates
B - can they be palatable enough to management to be accepted
05-31-2015 | 03:17 AM
#5195
Racketeer
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 13,327
Likes: 818
From: N60.4858 W149.9327
A + b =c
Part A
This document was put out by DPA. I am posting it for reference only. This is NOT an endorsement of DPA. I am unwilling to duplicate work already done. (lazy and don't mind stealing information)
This only a screen shot of the document. It shows a single number is representative of the percent needed to get to the scale. The other pages of their document mirror this for other positions.
18.3%
Screenshot (41).jpg
We are asking for an 18.3% increase in pilot salaries.
This document was put out by DPA. I am posting it for reference only. This is NOT an endorsement of DPA. I am unwilling to duplicate work already done. (lazy and don't mind stealing information)
This only a screen shot of the document. It shows a single number is representative of the percent needed to get to the scale. The other pages of their document mirror this for other positions.
18.3%
Screenshot (41).jpg
We are asking for an 18.3% increase in pilot salaries.
05-31-2015 | 03:31 AM
#5196
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,877
Likes: 194
My understanding is our fate is down to 3 swing votes on the MEC. You can talk to anyone you want but if you know these guys you need to make them comfortable with the go-around. If this gets TAed it's game over. All I can say is wind the watch, expand the team.
If this special session is the rumored vote session only a personal touch to assure them there is more game to play can really help. I tried to show the company has the means to give in order to build confidence and resolve. Right now it's up to those individuals. We have little influence except to prop up these guys. Hoping I'm wrong. We are going to have to take, we won't be given.
If this special session is the rumored vote session only a personal touch to assure them there is more game to play can really help. I tried to show the company has the means to give in order to build confidence and resolve. Right now it's up to those individuals. We have little influence except to prop up these guys. Hoping I'm wrong. We are going to have to take, we won't be given.
05-31-2015 | 03:39 AM
#5197
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 391
Likes: 1
From: Utah Chapter
Part A
This document was put out by DPA. I am posting it for reference only. This is NOT an endorsement of DPA. I am unwilling to duplicate work already done. (lazy and don't mind stealing information)
This only a screen shot of the document. It shows a single number is representative of the percent needed to get to the scale. The other pages of their document mirror this for other positions.
18.3%
Attachment 2120
We are asking for an 18.3% increase in pilot salaries.
This document was put out by DPA. I am posting it for reference only. This is NOT an endorsement of DPA. I am unwilling to duplicate work already done. (lazy and don't mind stealing information)
This only a screen shot of the document. It shows a single number is representative of the percent needed to get to the scale. The other pages of their document mirror this for other positions.
18.3%
Attachment 2120
We are asking for an 18.3% increase in pilot salaries.
Not saying that is attainable, or that it in any way takes into account other factors, but such is the effect of even relatively flat inflation if we look solely at pay rates.
05-31-2015 | 03:43 AM
#5198
Racketeer
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 13,327
Likes: 818
From: N60.4858 W149.9327
A+b=c
What is 18.3% in dollars.
You will have to use your surface or go to Deltanet for this one.
Inside our business: Flight Operations - page 5 the flight ops expense graph shows pilot salaries at 75% of a 3 billion dollar budget or 2.25 billion.
2.25B X 18.3% = 411.75M
We are asking for:
$412 million/year
You will have to use your surface or go to Deltanet for this one.
Inside our business: Flight Operations - page 5 the flight ops expense graph shows pilot salaries at 75% of a 3 billion dollar budget or 2.25 billion.
2.25B X 18.3% = 411.75M
We are asking for:
$412 million/year
05-31-2015 | 04:04 AM
#5199
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,877
Likes: 194
What is 18.3% in dollars.
You will have to use your surface or go to Deltanet for this one.
Inside our business: Flight Operations - page 5 the flight ops expense graph shows pilot salaries at 75% of a 3 billion dollar budget or 2.25 billion.
2.25B X 18.3% = 411.75M
We are asking for:
$412 million/year
You will have to use your surface or go to Deltanet for this one.
Inside our business: Flight Operations - page 5 the flight ops expense graph shows pilot salaries at 75% of a 3 billion dollar budget or 2.25 billion.
2.25B X 18.3% = 411.75M
We are asking for:
$412 million/year
05-31-2015 | 04:40 AM
#5200
Racketeer
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 13,327
Likes: 818
From: N60.4858 W149.9327
a+b=c
Part B
Is there a way to make this scale acceptable to management?
Management is accountable to the board but more importantly wall street. This group of managers has done an excellent job with the merger and the climb from bankruptcy. Credit is due here and their track record must be respected.
If this is going to happen they need to be able to frame it as an acceptable reward of our partnership or as at minimal cost or cost neutral.
We have some things that are in our control.
1) This deal and its timeline are about labor peace.
Labor peace is the foundation of the brand. They have a lot to lose if we were less motivated and moral was bad. Think about all the effort to get you out in front of the customer. Your hello my name is captain xxx cards. The HVC recognition efforts. The podium presentations when we are late. All of this goes away and that filters to other work groups. Gate agents upset because flight crews are late. Flight attendants who are not pleasant because they are boarding without pilots because we aren't willing to hustle to the next gate. That sets a negative tone when people are on airplanes waiting for crew. The operation is humming so well we have to be told to slow down occasionally.
Right now we command a 15% premium domestically. That disappears quickly if we go much beyond the amendable date.
2) They need to take back some profit sharing.
This is hugely unpopular, I know and agree we should keep it. Here's why. The goal is to be recognized as a high quality industrial company that is able to consistently return cash to shareholders. We are almost there. Our financials are inline, margins are good, debt load improving, credit improving. (very close to investment grade bond rating 6 years out of bankruptcy)
A major hurtle is compensation structure. High quality industrials don't pay profits to labor. The 2014 16.58% profit sharing is about as high as they can go with out breaking the mold. Normally pay based on company performance is for only the top tier not labor. If you pay a percentage the recipient has to be bringing revenue to the company. Sales is the obvious example. This is evident in the Q+A portion of the earnings transcript I posted earlier. If you heard the audio you know Mr. Anderson wanted nothing to do with this question but telegraphed a change.
The flip side is that you don't pay more than your peers for labor unless they are worth it. We are worth it. Our operational statistics are stellar. Again this would suffer if we are less happy.
How can they reward us and save face on cost?
Is there a way to make this scale acceptable to management?
Management is accountable to the board but more importantly wall street. This group of managers has done an excellent job with the merger and the climb from bankruptcy. Credit is due here and their track record must be respected.
If this is going to happen they need to be able to frame it as an acceptable reward of our partnership or as at minimal cost or cost neutral.
We have some things that are in our control.
1) This deal and its timeline are about labor peace.
Labor peace is the foundation of the brand. They have a lot to lose if we were less motivated and moral was bad. Think about all the effort to get you out in front of the customer. Your hello my name is captain xxx cards. The HVC recognition efforts. The podium presentations when we are late. All of this goes away and that filters to other work groups. Gate agents upset because flight crews are late. Flight attendants who are not pleasant because they are boarding without pilots because we aren't willing to hustle to the next gate. That sets a negative tone when people are on airplanes waiting for crew. The operation is humming so well we have to be told to slow down occasionally.
Right now we command a 15% premium domestically. That disappears quickly if we go much beyond the amendable date.
2) They need to take back some profit sharing.
This is hugely unpopular, I know and agree we should keep it. Here's why. The goal is to be recognized as a high quality industrial company that is able to consistently return cash to shareholders. We are almost there. Our financials are inline, margins are good, debt load improving, credit improving. (very close to investment grade bond rating 6 years out of bankruptcy)
A major hurtle is compensation structure. High quality industrials don't pay profits to labor. The 2014 16.58% profit sharing is about as high as they can go with out breaking the mold. Normally pay based on company performance is for only the top tier not labor. If you pay a percentage the recipient has to be bringing revenue to the company. Sales is the obvious example. This is evident in the Q+A portion of the earnings transcript I posted earlier. If you heard the audio you know Mr. Anderson wanted nothing to do with this question but telegraphed a change.
The flip side is that you don't pay more than your peers for labor unless they are worth it. We are worth it. Our operational statistics are stellar. Again this would suffer if we are less happy.
How can they reward us and save face on cost?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
