Details on Delta TA
06-09-2015 | 07:01 AM
#6481
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 679
Likes: 0
How should I feel? I have made no comments about the TA other then ask for specifics on rumors posted. My first look is that we will gain jobs on the work rule side. I don't like the payrates but if you end up with the NMB they are at the top of the industry.
Many of the rumors posted here did not come to pass. No pay banding, no third party sick verification, no reduction in sick hours, no increase in training freeze except in base moves by a new hire.
There are a bunch of quality of life improvements and many areas of past complaints have been addressed. In total those items have significant value.
There are negatives. The obvious is the potential 5.7% reduction in profit sharing if PTEX is above 6 billion. This year will however be only the second time in history that has happened. The sick verification requirement change I don't like. I can live with the RJ changes given its a net reduction and the 2 for 1 gain at the mainline. I don't fully understand the switch to block hours from EASK but the new compliance periods are a big improvement.
Overall I don't like the payrates but can live with the rest. I had to vote today I would vote no because of the payrates. I will attend the road shows and read what I can. I need to see the costed values in all the work rule changes. We will all get one vote. I suspect this will be a very close vote.
Many of the rumors posted here did not come to pass. No pay banding, no third party sick verification, no reduction in sick hours, no increase in training freeze except in base moves by a new hire.
There are a bunch of quality of life improvements and many areas of past complaints have been addressed. In total those items have significant value.
There are negatives. The obvious is the potential 5.7% reduction in profit sharing if PTEX is above 6 billion. This year will however be only the second time in history that has happened. The sick verification requirement change I don't like. I can live with the RJ changes given its a net reduction and the 2 for 1 gain at the mainline. I don't fully understand the switch to block hours from EASK but the new compliance periods are a big improvement.
Overall I don't like the payrates but can live with the rest. I had to vote today I would vote no because of the payrates. I will attend the road shows and read what I can. I need to see the costed values in all the work rule changes. We will all get one vote. I suspect this will be a very close vote.
06-09-2015 | 07:03 AM
#6483
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 391
Likes: 1
From: Utah Chapter
The problem they're having with the huge OE/GS bonanza is a direct result of the 3 yr hiring freeze. Not our problem to solve. A tiny bit of the next $6B sitting around waiting for a stock buyback would give them some options.
06-09-2015 | 07:03 AM
#6484
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,108
Likes: 0
06-09-2015 | 07:04 AM
#6486
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,877
Likes: 194
I Know they aren't supposed to vote till tomm, is that still gonna be true?
What is the mood of the reps? Outraged, passive, etc?
Just trying to gauge if this turd will float...
Are they having an open honest debate? And who is grilling the negotiators/MEC over this?
Thx.
What is the mood of the reps? Outraged, passive, etc?
Just trying to gauge if this turd will float...
Are they having an open honest debate? And who is grilling the negotiators/MEC over this?
Thx.
06-09-2015 | 07:06 AM
#6487
Line Holder
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 1
06-09-2015 | 07:06 AM
#6488
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,108
Likes: 0
How is that spin? I don't like the new verification, but currently we get nothing for our unused sick time. I've had 80 hours of unused time every year but 1.
I'm just passing along what's being briefed at the meeting. You can decide if you like it or not. This piece for me is a positive. YMMV
I'm just passing along what's being briefed at the meeting. You can decide if you like it or not. This piece for me is a positive. YMMV
06-09-2015 | 07:07 AM
#6489
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
From: DAL FO
I Know they aren't supposed to vote till tomm, is that still gonna be true?
What is the mood of the reps? Outraged, passive, etc?
Just trying to gauge if this turd will float...
Are they having an open honest debate? And who is grilling the negotiators/MEC over this?
Thx.
What is the mood of the reps? Outraged, passive, etc?
Just trying to gauge if this turd will float...
Are they having an open honest debate? And who is grilling the negotiators/MEC over this?
Thx.
Any comment on mood would be speculation as none of the reps have spoken yet. From the peanut gallery I have no sense of where they are leaning.
06-09-2015 | 07:07 AM
#6490
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
Payrates:
21.5% compounded over 3 years
3.5% margin + PS on AA rates
45.4% compounded over 6 years counting C2012
Satisfied with this section
DC fund goes to 16% 1/17
Would rather have seen the extra 1% in fixed pay rates. Not a deal killer.
Per diem increase, vacation pay, CQ pay, etc
Yawn. Money could be utilized anywhere within the contract.
Company commits to 100 seat jet
More RJ reductions via 2:1 gearing. 2 100 seaters allow 1 additional 70 or 76 seat jet. DCI shrinks to 425 from 450. Total seats also decline by 2%. DCI block hour ratio enhanced from 1.35 to 1.81.
Nothing to hate here. More transferal of flying from DCI to mainline. Jobs=airframes. This mechanism works great for C2012 and continues.
Joint Venture Scope
Needs more study
Reroute improvements
No issues.
Sick Leave
No issues. I can verify beyond 80 hours instead of 100. Need some clarification whether process remains the same, i.e. pre-emptive verification if pilot desires, etc.
The rest is fluff and stuff.
Impression:
Solid industry leading contract. I would have preferred more monetization of profit sharing into fixed rates. But, if this board is any indication, the pilot group likely wants to carry the risk associated with PS.
RA wants us to lead the industry in pay rates. He also knows the PS is an expense, contrary to what I read here. It is profit that could go to capital expenditures or to shareholders. If he is on the hook to pay us, it's an expense. We clearly wanted to retain PS and I bet he wants to keep it in place as well in order to provide motivation. He is going to count PS as part of total compensation, as he should. Adding our profit sharing to the 3.5% margin on AA, we will be well ahead of AA in good years and firmly ahead on breakeven or worse years.
RJ flying transfer to mainline continues.
I'll vote for it if it makes it through the MEC
Ratified 60%
21.5% compounded over 3 years
3.5% margin + PS on AA rates
45.4% compounded over 6 years counting C2012
Satisfied with this section
DC fund goes to 16% 1/17
Would rather have seen the extra 1% in fixed pay rates. Not a deal killer.
Per diem increase, vacation pay, CQ pay, etc
Yawn. Money could be utilized anywhere within the contract.
Company commits to 100 seat jet
More RJ reductions via 2:1 gearing. 2 100 seaters allow 1 additional 70 or 76 seat jet. DCI shrinks to 425 from 450. Total seats also decline by 2%. DCI block hour ratio enhanced from 1.35 to 1.81.
Nothing to hate here. More transferal of flying from DCI to mainline. Jobs=airframes. This mechanism works great for C2012 and continues.
Joint Venture Scope
Needs more study
Reroute improvements
No issues.
Sick Leave
No issues. I can verify beyond 80 hours instead of 100. Need some clarification whether process remains the same, i.e. pre-emptive verification if pilot desires, etc.
The rest is fluff and stuff.
Impression:
Solid industry leading contract. I would have preferred more monetization of profit sharing into fixed rates. But, if this board is any indication, the pilot group likely wants to carry the risk associated with PS.
RA wants us to lead the industry in pay rates. He also knows the PS is an expense, contrary to what I read here. It is profit that could go to capital expenditures or to shareholders. If he is on the hook to pay us, it's an expense. We clearly wanted to retain PS and I bet he wants to keep it in place as well in order to provide motivation. He is going to count PS as part of total compensation, as he should. Adding our profit sharing to the 3.5% margin on AA, we will be well ahead of AA in good years and firmly ahead on breakeven or worse years.
RJ flying transfer to mainline continues.
I'll vote for it if it makes it through the MEC
Ratified 60%
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
