![]() |
Originally Posted by gzsg
(Post 1711991)
Why does management want to reduce our profit sharing so badly??
Reducing profit sharing one more penny ensures cost neutral and destroys any hope of a "historic" C2015. "Follow the Money". If profit sharing is reduced, instead of that money going to the employees, that money gets paid out to share holders as dividends, and helps the stock price go up. Who are some of the largest share holders of Delta Stock? (management) Who gets PAID in Delta Stock Options? (management) Now you know why they want to reduce the pay out to employees, through profit sharing and instead put that money in their own pockets, through dividends and stock price run up. It's human nature, nothing personal, just business. They all want the same thing we want, more money and more time off, oh, and Ed wants a good night's sleep... :rolleyes: I'm fine with that, but only -after- they have repaid the PILOTS for our pay cuts and lost retirement money. Who's money are they spending on dividends... to themselves? YOURS! |
Originally Posted by Herkflyr
(Post 1711765)
DALPA did release its opening position. It was $346 an hour while the current highest pilot rate in the world was $223 an hour (NWA 744A). We "settled" at $265/hr. You wouldn't believe the amount of beotching, moaning and groaning that ensued after that (from the pilots, not mgmt). You would have thought we agreed to a pay CUT. Same lament as now, different day ("we are pushovers, mgmt won again, when will we fight?" etc etc etc)
Funny, those same guys are now the ones most proud of what we achieved back then. It still amazes me that we will never see our survey results and we will never know what our opening position is for C2015. Carl |
Originally Posted by Herkflyr
(Post 1712009)
Now is the time to be sure. Why do you think that I--or anyone else outside of "be humble" SD for that matter--am not in favor of more money and more time off?
So now, today, the question becomes how much more. How much does it take to achieve our objective? What is our objective? With DALPA, we don't know. All we know is some nebulous desire to "improve at every opportunity." (where's the emoticon for vomiting?) And based on our track record post bankruptcy, that means small (single digit annually) improvements that barely keep ahead of inflation over time. Based on DALPA's track record, communications, and stated objective... bankruptcy established a new baseline from which we seek our improvements. And those improvements are nowhere near anything even remotely like what it would take to restore our buying power to what we had in the 1980's, 1990's, and early 2000's. |
Originally Posted by DAL 88 Driver
(Post 1712037)
You miss the important point here. We should have defined our objective as restoration and used that data point to bolster our case.
So, if market value is a driver and SWA is a point for which we can aim, let's do that. But we have to work from what their contract guarantees them -- not what they happen to have at that time.
Originally Posted by DAL 88 Driver
(Post 1712037)
Heck, you even disputed it today in one of your posts where you tried to cast doubts on the validity of the data by claiming it amounted to nothing more than a "sales pitch" to the AirTran pilots.
I have no idea to what extent (if at all) that this occurred, mind you. I just find it fascinating that, in your mind, SWAPA cannot possibly be anything other than perfect while your own fellow Delta pilots lie, spin, and cheat to get their way, which is presumably something other than getting you (and them) the greatest amount of compensation possible.
Originally Posted by DAL 88 Driver
(Post 1712037)
...nonsense about staffing levels and contractual guarantees.
Did you not allude to that? |
Originally Posted by Alan Shore
(Post 1711794)
One could say the same for you and that SWAPA infomercial for the new AirTran guys.
But it's very interesting that you would call it that. Why would you do that? Why wouldn't you have wanted to use it to the maximum possible extent as leverage? Why would you purposely demean its content, thus ruining the help it could be to us? It is this kind of behavior that is unmasking you for yet another pilot that has been completely co-opted by management/DALPA. It's certainly your right to have such total alliance with those who want to minimize our profession, but the behavior needs to be called out for what it is. Carl |
Originally Posted by Alan Shore
(Post 1711806)
I agree that all of these, except perhaps the 401(k) piece, provide us with leverage we did not have in 2000. The industry comparison is the one component that is still not as good as it was back then.
I'm hoping that, in aggregate, our leverage is higher now than it was then. Carl |
Originally Posted by shiznit
(Post 1711801)
We are still way under-compensated overall, but the focus needs to be increasing W2, days off, and other QOL also...... NOT just one part of Section 3.
Originally Posted by Purple Drank
(Post 1711823)
So you agree that QOL is inadequate. Yet you and all the Dalpa regulars pushed hard on C12 with negligible overall improvements--in return for flat-out concessions--in the interest of "fleeting opportunities" and "the time value of money."
Carl |
Originally Posted by RonRicco
(Post 1711873)
No. It is just an attempt by PD to try and make it seem like that anyone who has different/opposing positions, must be on FPL/Dalpa insider, to justify to himself (and any lurkers) the fact many on here (and at Delta as a whole) don't agree with him.
What other justification would he have to always throw that dart? Carl |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1711707)
Delta's block our cost to staff a 737 is well above SW for 2013 the last year the data is out for. We are almost 20% above them.
Crew each airplane with 64 crews each flight. I don't care. Put 86% on reserve. Not my problem. But all that skews the staffing numbers as well as our well diversified fleet. Why do you do this? |
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1712062)
That "infomercial" as you call it was absolutely factual in every way.
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1712062)
But it's very interesting that you would call it that. Why would you do that? Why wouldn't you have wanted to use it to the maximum possible extent as leverage? Why would you purposely demean its content, thus ruining the help it could be to us?
How does that affect our leverage for C2015?
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1712062)
It is this kind of behavior that is unmasking you for yet another pilot that has been completely co-opted by management/DALPA.
(Name the movie.) |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:49 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands