Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)
-   -   Details on Delta TA (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/88532-details-delta-ta.html)

SayAlt 06-13-2015 02:33 PM


Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1904218)
Denny, I made a word document for you:

Denny Cranes Dozen Reasons To Vote No



You used the wrong photo. Other than that...it was very flowery. :D

Denny Crane 06-13-2015 02:33 PM


Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1904218)
Denny, I made a word document for you:

Denny Cranes Dozen Reasons To Vote No

Ha ha!:)

That is bootiful!

Denny

slowplay 06-13-2015 02:35 PM


Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 1904182)
Okay, here is a partial list which I have posted before:

Denny,

I think you've allowed some incomplete or bad analysis of the items in your list. I'm a little pressed for time, but here's a quick response.


Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 1904182)
1. According to Credit Suisse (sp) after pilot contract costs are applied, this TA will put $100 million a year BACK in Deltas pocket when they apply the new profit sharing metric Company wide. This TA will actually ADD to our profit sharing! :eek: it doesn't cost the company one red cent! Which isn't a bad thing but when you look at the whole deal, you have to consider this..

In my view, you can't use the CS or Barrons (which used incorrect numbers) reports without taking into account or discounting your item #3. The non-contracts will get a pay raise, in my view. Their pay raise will be like C2012, completely eating up the profit sharing "savings" but minimizing the additional cost growth. Neither article takes that into account. If you believe that 3B4 will protect us, then this piece doesn't work.




Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 1904182)
2. Loss if Profit Sharing/buying our own raise along with changing the metric for measuring PTIX. It will lower the payout

I'm still trying to find out what the why and the cost of the profit sharing change regarding management comp, and I haven't seen an authoritative answer. As far as buying our raise, I disagree. This is a 8/3/3 contract, with $120 million paid early and 6% of profit sharing converted to pay. I view that conversion as a smart thing to do. The 2012 profit sharing that used to be worth 2.1% of pay is now worth about 1.6% due to compounding a fixed number. That same thing will play out over time on a larger scale with this conversion. Also, even though 8/3/3 is lower than 4/6.5/3/3 from 2012, it's worth the same dollar amount due to compounding.


Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 1904182)
3. IMO the company will give another raise to delta employees within the nex 18 months. This should trigger 3.b.4 and provide a 3% (?) raise. Also, the change in how 3.b.4 is calculated makes this clause completely worthless

See item 1 above. I don't think the change makes 3.b.4 worthless, as UAL has profit sharing, but it does diminish its value.


Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 1904182)
4. Pulling 75% of the LCA trips out affects not only the 180 claimed by Dalpa but every other FO in the category. Some will be pushed back to reserve. Don't take my word for this. Over on the other forum(where I do not post), a former negotiator said this, not me.

Absolutely a concession. Also moves toward industry standard (which sucks).


Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 1904182)
5. More large RJs. I probably could be convinced this isn't a huge bad thing but it is a bad thing.

To get those 25 large RJ's we get 50 new narrowbodies AND a block hour ratio that protects against shrinkage. This continues transference of flying back to mainline 3 years ahead of our competitors and will open up a bunch of new west coast captain seats.


Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 1904182)
6. Changing the JV measurement metric. In my book this is a HUGE give back.

I'm going to have to wait on the experts (I've sent questions to the code share committee), but I believe that GeorgeTg has a bunch wrong in his analysis. There are parts that are clearly concessionary (management immediately being back in compliance) but there are parts that provide us significant protections from AZ pulling out of the alliance, AF/KLM actions and our own upgauging.


Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 1904182)
7. Sick leave is also a huge give here. Just moving away from the voluntary verification is huge. Allowing the company to question my doctor (who happens to be an AME) is huge. Dr. sure will not be happy about that. When does it stop?

Sick leave is clearly concessionary. It leaves us with a better program than AMR and UAL, but in my view worse than SWA (even though they don't have as many hours).


Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 1904182)
8. New hire freeze to 24 months. Ok, throw them under the bus.

I don't see it as quite the bus throwing you do. They can move bases and move equipment (so not really frozen), they just have the new hire freeze added on to what their new equipment freeze is.


Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 1904182)
9. On a year to year basis C2015 will be worth less than C2012. What kind of negotiating environment are we in now compared to then?

This isn't true. On a year to year basis TA2015 delivers more money sooner than C2012 did, and it has about $200+ million more in total value. TVM actually worked, and it's compounded.


Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 1904182)
10. Use sick leave time to determine if you are eligible for a green slip. Fail

Concession. But it's not really sick leave time, it's FAR time had you flown the trip. If you'd have been legal to pick it up had you flown the sick trip, you'll still get the greenslip with your seniority.


Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 1904182)
11. Did I mention 1.E.9? I'm really not too worried about this one. I don't think any MEC Chairman would be that dumb. But why tempt fate?

Another one I'm asking questions about intent and why it's there.


Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 1904182)
12. What is it, ten or fifteen cent raise in per diem by the end of the contract. 15 minutes added to a vacation day and training. Not anywhere near enough.

The per diem is matched with AMR and UAL. The vacation and training are less than I'd like, but add another 1% to pay.



Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 1904182)
Okay, here is the list you asked for. tThere are a dozen reasons to say no. Some are big and some are not. In the aggregate this is a NO vote in my book.

Denny

Your vote is yours to cast, and thanks for considering the aggregate. Good luck to us all!

MtEverest 06-13-2015 02:35 PM


Originally Posted by Bananie (Post 1903971)
Here is how I see it:

This hysteria about medical records is stupid, is Delta going to sell your medical records to the Russian mafia?

Not a big deal if you aren't a pilot. Using hyperbole in an attempt to label every pilot who cares about their private medical records and how they get used isn't helping you.

I get it, part of your strategy is to throw out so many inaccurate statements and cause so much confusion, downplaying all the negative, something's gotta stick eventually?

For the record, your position on the medical records is in the severe minority. You sure are cocky in your attempt to beat down expectations. I take back what I said earlier. You are a pilot. You work for the arrogant MEC. Hell, you might be freaking Donetelli himself by the looks of your comments here.

GunshipGuy 06-13-2015 02:36 PM

Another indicator the NC got rolled on this TA: $0.05 per diem increase. Seriously, if that isn't a slap in the face, what is? Granted, it's not enough to vote it down, but it does indicate how poorly s job the NC did and what their effectiveness was. The inability to do better in per diem is but one of the indicators of how this NC FAILED on so many levels.

forgot to bid 06-13-2015 02:37 PM


Originally Posted by SayAlt (Post 1904226)
The key to understanding all that is understanding why RA wants to put this thing to bed so quickly. It is mgmt that is pushing a fast-track deal here, not the pilot group.

What is RA's urgency???


Originally Posted by georgetg (Post 1904227)
If you want to live in fear, vote no

If you want sunshine and unicorns, vote yes

Any questions?

Cheers
George

I'll quote you guys since you're actually pilots at Delta.

Negotiators are paid to negotiate. They can come up with a plan B.

forgot to bid 06-13-2015 02:42 PM

BTW, the MEC reps do indeed have a plan B.


I agree with many of the MEC representatives that an alternate path is achievable by reengaging the company to address the issues we have with this current TA. The environment we are in should be favorable to achieve a fair and balanced agreement that addresses pilot concerns as well as those of the company.

MSP Vice Chair
12JUN2015

slowplay 06-13-2015 02:43 PM


Originally Posted by GunshipGuy (Post 1904233)
Another indicator the NC got rolled on this TA: $0.05 per diem increase. Seriously, if that isn't a slap in the face, what is? Granted, it's not enough to vote it down, but it does indicate how poorly s job the NC did and what their effectiveness was?The inability to do better in per diem is but one of the indicators of how this NC FAILED on so many levels.

This is an indicator that you actually need to read the agreement rather than trust internet talking points.

Take a look at Section 5.B. Per Diem goes up every year, and matches UAL and AMR.

Hope you're not missing the slap.:D

dalad 06-13-2015 02:47 PM

They talk about getting parked by the NMB like the SWA pilots. Gues who the VP of Labor Relations is over there? One Randolph Babbitt. You just can't make this stuff up.

Ferd149 06-13-2015 02:54 PM

Slow,

What's your take on the medical stuff? I seems very "mean spirited" to say the least. RA and senior management talks highly of us in the press, and then they present us with something like this.

Where did it come from?

Ferd


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:31 PM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands