Details on Delta TA
07-25-2014, 08:09 PM
#71
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,299
Originally Posted by gzsg
6000 initial training cycles in 12 months.
One would have to make some assumptions as to the reduction in these training cycles under a pay banding system to come up with the number of jobs it would cost. If the number of training cycles were cut in half, then that would cost about 375 jobs. At around $200K per job (including pay and benefits), that's a savings of about $75M per year, or just over 3% of pay.
Those savings would be offset by the cost of increasing the aircraft currently below the band up to the pay level of the band. No idea what that would cost, but it would certainly cut into the 3% of pay being saved.
07-25-2014, 08:16 PM
#72
Runs with scissors
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,722
Originally Posted by tsquare
With guys like you and Carl on the equipment, there is no room for any of the rest of us. No insult intended Timbo, but you are young and at the top of the hill. As long as DAL has only a few of the biggest equipment, and there are 12,000 of us, there is a huge number that will never be able to hold that equipment for any length of time. Damn right I wouldn't bid up. I might even "down"bid to the fluff so that I could have an even better QOL. Why should my QOL have to suffer in order to fly to SYD rather than doing ATL turns? Quality... of... Life. I still wonder why it's importance got put on a backburner... The advantage of being able to enjoy seniority and wait to fly a single sucky year went away with our DB retirement plans. Now... when the vast majority of us will be able to hold that equipment, it will be too late to do anything meaningful towards your retirement. Bad QOL and no money to show for it in retirement. At least I can hope for age 67. Yup.. Great idea.
I'm only here for the money.
And the time off.
And the layovers.
In that order.
If we had one big pay band, I'd probably bid what ever is flying the BCN, DUB, HNL and BOS layovers.
But so would everybody else, I doubt I could hold BCN.
And new hires would be flying the LOS and DKR trips, as it should be!
What worries me is, if we do go to pay banding, outside of the reduced pilot staffing it would require (through increased productivity, just like PBS and no cap on swaps) is, if we pay a 717 Capt. the same as a 737 Capt. where 110 seats pays the same as 180 seats, then how do we justify our 777 pay relative to RJ pay?
In the next contract (2020?) the company will come to us and say, "We can't afford to be paying a 767 Capt. the same as a 747 Capt. The 767 is just too expensive, we're going to park it unless you give us..."
So now, just like the RJ's have been dragging down our narrow body pay for the past 20 years, they will pull the same crap with the rest of our equipment, next time the economy turns south, and you KNOW it will at some point.
For the company, it's Win-Win. They get the first win when they don't have to hire 10% more pilots, due to nobody bidding up for a higher paying seat.
They get the second win when the economy turns south, and they come to us and say they just can't afford to pay a 717 driver the same as a 737 driver, so they have to outsource the 717 flying...again.
The single biggest failure of ALPA National, since The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, is to NOT set an Industry wide pay rate for seats/equipment, for all ALPA carriers, and to NOT have a National Seniority List.
They KNEW the industry would eventually consolidate, and they sat by and did nothing as Eastern, Pan Am and TWA and CAL and US AIR went down the toilet, lost pay, retirements and their jobs, while dragging the rest of the industry down too.
Then the B scale came to AA, a non-ALPA carrier, and National ALPA let it come to ALPA carriers.
Then the RJ's came, and they still did nothing to stop the spread of low budget jet flying.
Then the bankruptcies came, and there still was no mention of any SOS or any other means to stop the downward spiral.
And now, finally, what's left of the Legacy Carriers are making Billions per quarter, and there's zero talk of restoration.
None.
Like it never happened.
Pay banding is the final straw that will eventually lead to all of us making RJ wages.
Oh, and there'll be much less mainline flying jobs for the RJ guys to move into, if we aren't moving up, so there's that too...
07-25-2014, 08:38 PM
#73
Runs with scissors
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,722
Originally Posted by Alan Shore
Just spit balling the staffing implications of this -- if the average training cycle is 1 1/2 months long, including sim training and OE, then every 8 cycles means one additional pilot required. That's about 750 additional pilots required, not including SLIs.
One would have to make some assumptions as to the reduction in these training cycles under a pay banding system to come up with the number of jobs it would cost. If the number of training cycles were cut in half, then that would cost about 375 jobs. At around $200K per job (including pay and benefits), that's a savings of about $75M per year, or just over 3% of pay.
Those savings would be offset by the cost of increasing the aircraft currently below the band up to the pay level of the band. No idea what that would cost, but it would certainly cut into the 3% of pay being saved.
One would have to make some assumptions as to the reduction in these training cycles under a pay banding system to come up with the number of jobs it would cost. If the number of training cycles were cut in half, then that would cost about 375 jobs. At around $200K per job (including pay and benefits), that's a savings of about $75M per year, or just over 3% of pay.
Those savings would be offset by the cost of increasing the aircraft currently below the band up to the pay level of the band. No idea what that would cost, but it would certainly cut into the 3% of pay being saved.
You think you've seen stagnation?
Just wait.
Here's a quick way to see what's going to happen. When the results of this latest A/E are posted, count up all the open positions that were on the original bid, then count the number of pilots who got bids.
Now subtract the small number (original bid openings) from the big number (actual awards).
That's how many jobs it will cost, every bid.
Last edited by Timbo; 07-25-2014 at 08:56 PM.
07-26-2014, 03:20 AM
#74
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by Timbo
I hear you T2.
I'm only here for the money.
And the time off.
And the layovers.
In that order.
I hear that
If we had one big pay band, I'd probably bid what ever is flying the BCN, DUB, HNL and BOS layovers.
But so would everybody else, I doubt I could hold BCN.
And new hires would be flying the LOS and DKR trips, as it should be!
What worries me is, if we do go to pay banding, outside of the reduced pilot staffing it would require (through increased productivity, just like PBS and no cap on swaps) is, if we pay a 717 Capt. the same as a 737 Capt. where 110 seats pays the same as 180 seats, then how do we justify our 777 pay relative to RJ pay?
I think you need to step back from the number of seats thingy. Management is not going to be downgauging the airline being that we are 1 of 3. Until UAL's gauge is right sized down (A big part of their problems making any real money) We will probably not grow larger as fast as you and I would like, but when their fleets are more rational we should all see a gradual increase in size commensurate with the population. IOW, it is one more nail in the coffin of the RJ experiment. Besides, your fears have been coming true at mainline. THe 75/76 fleet used to be 35% of the fleet of DAL. With the demise of the 757s and the introduction of the 737-900ERETOPS, that has gone to the smaller airframe. But what about the 330s you ax? OK... bigger pays a little more.. but when are we gonna see them in any significant number? Not until you and I are sitting on the front porch shooting squirrels.
In the next contract (2020?) the company will come to us and say, "We can't afford to be paying a 767 Capt. the same as a 747 Capt. The 767 is just too expensive, we're going to park it unless you give us..."
How are they gonna do that when DAL is making $1.4Billion/quarter? It doesn't make sense. Besides, we could say, "Fine, sell 'em. You still have to pay me lots of money to drive your baby jets around. It is not now nor has it ever been our decision to buy/deploy airplanes. We just tell management how much it will be for us to operate them. They wanna downgauge? Fine, but they still have to pay Timbo and Tsquare lots of money to fly them and yell at FOs...
So now, just like the RJ's have been dragging down our narrow body pay for the past 20 years, they will pull the same crap with the rest of our equipment, next time the economy turns south, and you KNOW it will at some point.
Like I said, you and I will be shooting squirrels off the front porch. The bigger problem in that time will be the single piloted aircraft.
For the company, it's Win-Win. They get the first win when they don't have to hire 10% more pilots, due to nobody bidding up for a higher paying seat.
I really don't think we'll even notice that reduction in hiring. And I certainly don't believe it will be 10%. But the pooint is that nobody will HAVE to bid up to a higher paying seat, and pilots will have retirements taken care of earlier in their careers.
They get the second win when the economy turns south, and they come to us and say they just can't afford to pay a 717 driver the same as a 737 driver, so they have to outsource the 717 flying...again.
Only if we allow it will it be an issue. I frankly believe the days of scope sales for that are over. Think again about the oligopoly scenario. There will be other players that will get killed long before DAL will because many have zero fat in their operations to absorb those things.
The single biggest failure of ALPA National, since The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, is to NOT set an Industry wide pay rate for seats/equipment, for all ALPA carriers, and to NOT have a National Seniority List.
I agree with that. They should at least start a list tomorrow with the first newhire and see where it leads in 30 years...
They KNEW the industry would eventually consolidate, and they sat by and did nothing as Eastern, Pan Am and TWA and CAL and US AIR went down the toilet, lost pay, retirements and their jobs, while dragging the rest of the industry down too.
Then the B scale came to AA, a non-ALPA carrier, and National ALPA let it come to ALPA carriers.
Wasn't AMR ALPA in those days? I don't know..
Then the RJ's came, and they still did nothing to stop the spread of low budget jet flying.
Then the bankruptcies came, and there still was no mention of any SOS or any other means to stop the downward spiral.
No argument from me on that.
And now, finally, what's left of the Legacy Carriers are making Billions per quarter, and there's zero talk of restoration.
None.
Like it never happened.
I'm not sure I agree with that, but time will tell. I think it is a little too early to draw any meaningful conclusions based on hot air or cold air from dALPA at this point. We still have 6 months before openers. By Thanksgiving, I would think we should start to make some noise...
Pay banding is the final straw that will eventually lead to all of us making RJ wages.
Oh, and there'll be much less mainline flying jobs for the RJ guys to move into, if we aren't moving up, so there's that too...
I'm only here for the money.
And the time off.
And the layovers.
In that order.
I hear that
If we had one big pay band, I'd probably bid what ever is flying the BCN, DUB, HNL and BOS layovers.
But so would everybody else, I doubt I could hold BCN.
And new hires would be flying the LOS and DKR trips, as it should be!
What worries me is, if we do go to pay banding, outside of the reduced pilot staffing it would require (through increased productivity, just like PBS and no cap on swaps) is, if we pay a 717 Capt. the same as a 737 Capt. where 110 seats pays the same as 180 seats, then how do we justify our 777 pay relative to RJ pay?
I think you need to step back from the number of seats thingy. Management is not going to be downgauging the airline being that we are 1 of 3. Until UAL's gauge is right sized down (A big part of their problems making any real money) We will probably not grow larger as fast as you and I would like, but when their fleets are more rational we should all see a gradual increase in size commensurate with the population. IOW, it is one more nail in the coffin of the RJ experiment. Besides, your fears have been coming true at mainline. THe 75/76 fleet used to be 35% of the fleet of DAL. With the demise of the 757s and the introduction of the 737-900ERETOPS, that has gone to the smaller airframe. But what about the 330s you ax? OK... bigger pays a little more.. but when are we gonna see them in any significant number? Not until you and I are sitting on the front porch shooting squirrels.
In the next contract (2020?) the company will come to us and say, "We can't afford to be paying a 767 Capt. the same as a 747 Capt. The 767 is just too expensive, we're going to park it unless you give us..."
How are they gonna do that when DAL is making $1.4Billion/quarter? It doesn't make sense. Besides, we could say, "Fine, sell 'em. You still have to pay me lots of money to drive your baby jets around. It is not now nor has it ever been our decision to buy/deploy airplanes. We just tell management how much it will be for us to operate them. They wanna downgauge? Fine, but they still have to pay Timbo and Tsquare lots of money to fly them and yell at FOs...
So now, just like the RJ's have been dragging down our narrow body pay for the past 20 years, they will pull the same crap with the rest of our equipment, next time the economy turns south, and you KNOW it will at some point.
Like I said, you and I will be shooting squirrels off the front porch. The bigger problem in that time will be the single piloted aircraft.
For the company, it's Win-Win. They get the first win when they don't have to hire 10% more pilots, due to nobody bidding up for a higher paying seat.
I really don't think we'll even notice that reduction in hiring. And I certainly don't believe it will be 10%. But the pooint is that nobody will HAVE to bid up to a higher paying seat, and pilots will have retirements taken care of earlier in their careers.
They get the second win when the economy turns south, and they come to us and say they just can't afford to pay a 717 driver the same as a 737 driver, so they have to outsource the 717 flying...again.
Only if we allow it will it be an issue. I frankly believe the days of scope sales for that are over. Think again about the oligopoly scenario. There will be other players that will get killed long before DAL will because many have zero fat in their operations to absorb those things.
The single biggest failure of ALPA National, since The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, is to NOT set an Industry wide pay rate for seats/equipment, for all ALPA carriers, and to NOT have a National Seniority List.
I agree with that. They should at least start a list tomorrow with the first newhire and see where it leads in 30 years...
They KNEW the industry would eventually consolidate, and they sat by and did nothing as Eastern, Pan Am and TWA and CAL and US AIR went down the toilet, lost pay, retirements and their jobs, while dragging the rest of the industry down too.
Then the B scale came to AA, a non-ALPA carrier, and National ALPA let it come to ALPA carriers.
Wasn't AMR ALPA in those days? I don't know..
Then the RJ's came, and they still did nothing to stop the spread of low budget jet flying.
Then the bankruptcies came, and there still was no mention of any SOS or any other means to stop the downward spiral.
No argument from me on that.
And now, finally, what's left of the Legacy Carriers are making Billions per quarter, and there's zero talk of restoration.
None.
Like it never happened.
I'm not sure I agree with that, but time will tell. I think it is a little too early to draw any meaningful conclusions based on hot air or cold air from dALPA at this point. We still have 6 months before openers. By Thanksgiving, I would think we should start to make some noise...
Pay banding is the final straw that will eventually lead to all of us making RJ wages.
Oh, and there'll be much less mainline flying jobs for the RJ guys to move into, if we aren't moving up, so there's that too...
) DAL is a big big player now and will be going forward. I am not the least bit concerned about any whipsawing going forward...Sorry for the long post. All that on my first cup of Joe too.
07-26-2014, 03:23 AM
#75
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by Timbo
But it always cuts down on the body count.
You think you've seen stagnation?
Just wait.
Here's a quick way to see what's going to happen. When the results of this latest A/E are posted, count up all the open positions that were on the original bid, then count the number of pilots who got bids.
Now subtract the small number (original bid openings) from the big number (actual awards).
That's how many jobs it will cost, every bid.
You think you've seen stagnation?
Just wait.
Here's a quick way to see what's going to happen. When the results of this latest A/E are posted, count up all the open positions that were on the original bid, then count the number of pilots who got bids.
Now subtract the small number (original bid openings) from the big number (actual awards).
That's how many jobs it will cost, every bid.
07-26-2014, 03:48 AM
#76
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Originally Posted by Timbo
I hear you T2.
I'm only here for the money.
And the time off.
And the layovers.
In that order.
If we had one big pay band, I'd probably bid what ever is flying the BCN, DUB, HNL and BOS layovers.
But so would everybody else, I doubt I could hold BCN.
And new hires would be flying the LOS and DKR trips, as it should be!
What worries me is, if we do go to pay banding, outside of the reduced pilot staffing it would require (through increased productivity, just like PBS and no cap on swaps) is, if we pay a 717 Capt. the same as a 737 Capt. where 110 seats pays the same as 180 seats, then how do we justify our 777 pay relative to RJ pay?
In the next contract (2020?) the company will come to us and say, "We can't afford to be paying a 767 Capt. the same as a 747 Capt. The 767 is just too expensive, we're going to park it unless you give us..."
So now, just like the RJ's have been dragging down our narrow body pay for the past 20 years, they will pull the same crap with the rest of our equipment, next time the economy turns south, and you KNOW it will at some point.
For the company, it's Win-Win. They get the first win when they don't have to hire 10% more pilots, due to nobody bidding up for a higher paying seat.
They get the second win when the economy turns south, and they come to us and say they just can't afford to pay a 717 driver the same as a 737 driver, so they have to outsource the 717 flying...again.
The single biggest failure of ALPA National, since The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, is to NOT set an Industry wide pay rate for seats/equipment, for all ALPA carriers, and to NOT have a National Seniority List.
They KNEW the industry would eventually consolidate, and they sat by and did nothing as Eastern, Pan Am and TWA and CAL and US AIR went down the toilet, lost pay, retirements and their jobs, while dragging the rest of the industry down too.
Then the B scale came to AA, a non-ALPA carrier, and National ALPA let it come to ALPA carriers.
Then the RJ's came, and they still did nothing to stop the spread of low budget jet flying.
Then the bankruptcies came, and there still was no mention of any SOS or any other means to stop the downward spiral.
And now, finally, what's left of the Legacy Carriers are making Billions per quarter, and there's zero talk of restoration.
None.
Like it never happened.
Pay banding is the final straw that will eventually lead to all of us making RJ wages.
Oh, and there'll be much less mainline flying jobs for the RJ guys to move into, if we aren't moving up, so there's that too...
I'm only here for the money.
And the time off.
And the layovers.
In that order.
If we had one big pay band, I'd probably bid what ever is flying the BCN, DUB, HNL and BOS layovers.
But so would everybody else, I doubt I could hold BCN.
And new hires would be flying the LOS and DKR trips, as it should be!
What worries me is, if we do go to pay banding, outside of the reduced pilot staffing it would require (through increased productivity, just like PBS and no cap on swaps) is, if we pay a 717 Capt. the same as a 737 Capt. where 110 seats pays the same as 180 seats, then how do we justify our 777 pay relative to RJ pay?
In the next contract (2020?) the company will come to us and say, "We can't afford to be paying a 767 Capt. the same as a 747 Capt. The 767 is just too expensive, we're going to park it unless you give us..."
So now, just like the RJ's have been dragging down our narrow body pay for the past 20 years, they will pull the same crap with the rest of our equipment, next time the economy turns south, and you KNOW it will at some point.
For the company, it's Win-Win. They get the first win when they don't have to hire 10% more pilots, due to nobody bidding up for a higher paying seat.
They get the second win when the economy turns south, and they come to us and say they just can't afford to pay a 717 driver the same as a 737 driver, so they have to outsource the 717 flying...again.
The single biggest failure of ALPA National, since The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, is to NOT set an Industry wide pay rate for seats/equipment, for all ALPA carriers, and to NOT have a National Seniority List.
They KNEW the industry would eventually consolidate, and they sat by and did nothing as Eastern, Pan Am and TWA and CAL and US AIR went down the toilet, lost pay, retirements and their jobs, while dragging the rest of the industry down too.
Then the B scale came to AA, a non-ALPA carrier, and National ALPA let it come to ALPA carriers.
Then the RJ's came, and they still did nothing to stop the spread of low budget jet flying.
Then the bankruptcies came, and there still was no mention of any SOS or any other means to stop the downward spiral.
And now, finally, what's left of the Legacy Carriers are making Billions per quarter, and there's zero talk of restoration.
None.
Like it never happened.
Pay banding is the final straw that will eventually lead to all of us making RJ wages.
Oh, and there'll be much less mainline flying jobs for the RJ guys to move into, if we aren't moving up, so there's that too...
Absolutely spot on.
Carl
07-26-2014, 05:29 AM
#77
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,299
Originally Posted by Timbo
Here's a quick way to see what's going to happen. When the results of this latest A/E are posted, count up all the open positions that were on the original bid, then count the number of pilots who got bids.
Now subtract the small number (original bid openings) from the big number (actual awards).
That's how many jobs it will cost, every bid.
Now subtract the small number (original bid openings) from the big number (actual awards).
That's how many jobs it will cost, every bid.
The trick now is to figure out how many fewer such contingent vacancies there would be if we had fewer pay bands. For example, suppose we cut the number of different pay rates in half. Would that cut the total amount of training events in half? I don't know.
07-26-2014, 05:31 AM
#78
Runs with scissors
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,722
I just went to iCrew and copied the initial bid numbers:
(no, the awards are not out yet)
Total vacancies: capt: 184 f/o: 266 s/o: total system: 450
There were a total of 450 vacancies posted. Now let's see how many training events that will trigger when the awards are posted.
Anyone want to guess?
I'll guess it's at least 5x that number, about 2250. Want to guess how many greenslips that will require to cover their flying when that many guys are wrapped up training in ATL for a month?
But that ass-u-me's they back fill every F/O who moves up to Capt. and every Capt. who moves up to 747 Capt, etc. I bet they won't backfill them all. I'll bet they use this opportunity to slim down the categories where pilots depart for other categories, and do as little backfilling as possible, now that they can use reserves up to ALV + 15.
If we only had one big pay band, you would see only 450 guys going to school. The more we reduce the number of pay scales, the less bodies will be chasing higher paying seats, so they less bodies will be needed to fly the schedule. Pay banding is about reducing head count, and reducing green slips.
We will become "More Productive" with pay banding, which is a win for the Company, and a concession for us. Fine if you've already got a left seat, but if you thought you were stagnated in the right seat before pay banding, look out!
(no, the awards are not out yet)
Total vacancies: capt: 184 f/o: 266 s/o: total system: 450
There were a total of 450 vacancies posted. Now let's see how many training events that will trigger when the awards are posted.
Anyone want to guess?
I'll guess it's at least 5x that number, about 2250. Want to guess how many greenslips that will require to cover their flying when that many guys are wrapped up training in ATL for a month?
But that ass-u-me's they back fill every F/O who moves up to Capt. and every Capt. who moves up to 747 Capt, etc. I bet they won't backfill them all. I'll bet they use this opportunity to slim down the categories where pilots depart for other categories, and do as little backfilling as possible, now that they can use reserves up to ALV + 15.
If we only had one big pay band, you would see only 450 guys going to school. The more we reduce the number of pay scales, the less bodies will be chasing higher paying seats, so they less bodies will be needed to fly the schedule. Pay banding is about reducing head count, and reducing green slips.
We will become "More Productive" with pay banding, which is a win for the Company, and a concession for us. Fine if you've already got a left seat, but if you thought you were stagnated in the right seat before pay banding, look out!
07-26-2014, 06:16 AM
#79
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: Kickin’ Back
Posts: 6,971
You guy's have pretty much convinced me that pay banding is a bad thing. It will cost jobs but not the loss of 6000 jobs. If, there are 6000 training events in a year caused by 1000 retirements, and if 100% of the training events were eliminated, I calculate approximately 500 jobs lost. This is not including anything in the training dept. because of less training. A little bit of assuming here but follow me:
Assume one training event is one month long and each training event pays one month (ALV). If this is the case then 1 pilot job would equal 12 training events (12 months in a year). Take 6000 training events and divide by 12 would give you 500 pilot jobs. And that's if no training events at all happened. Even with pay banding, we know some training will happen so the number of lost pilot jobs will be somewhere between 0-500.
Denny
Assume one training event is one month long and each training event pays one month (ALV). If this is the case then 1 pilot job would equal 12 training events (12 months in a year). Take 6000 training events and divide by 12 would give you 500 pilot jobs. And that's if no training events at all happened. Even with pay banding, we know some training will happen so the number of lost pilot jobs will be somewhere between 0-500.
Denny
07-26-2014, 06:25 AM
#80
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: 7ER Capt
Posts: 461
Originally Posted by Timbo
Then the bankruptcies came, and there still was no mention of any SOS or any other means to stop the downward spiral.
They didn't and they never will... in fact, they recently made the subtle but important change to this acronym... from Suspension of Service to Save our Skies... Incredible! The founding fathers should be rolling in their graves.
This was our only tool to make a meaningful change to the completely one-sided RLA.
As such, our profession is effectively done... we will make very small improvements over time and that's it.
When 62% of my fellow pilots decided that a 3% pay increase was OK, after the greatest contract losses in history, I stopped caring.
It is what it is.
Btw, my glass is all the way full... I just consider myself a realist.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
