|
Time for change
I think we are better off with what we have now than this agreement. I have been here 26 years and after careful evaluation I will vote no. This agreement is not in the best interests of the Delta pilots. The Mec chairman can boast about being a tough guy from Chicago but we have been outfoxed. I can live with what we have now cause it's better than the ta
|
I'll wait for what we deserve. Fear mongers act like the chance of receiving retro pay is out the window. My survey said 2004 rates with inflation with no giveback on PS with no concessions. Delta is on tract to make a 20 billion profit the next 3 years. If not now, when?
|
How absolutely pathetic. A number of complete lies that fortunately were highlighted to the administration by ATL pilots during the road show. Almost no cons listed in this sales brochure, and then lies about the pros.
All 4 of these guys have got to be recalled. How could a single ATL FO want these guys as your reps given their vote to pull LCA trips from you? Carl |
For those who didn't read that whole council 44 update, here's all you need to see to understand the views of amateur negotiators:
this agreement is the result of intense negotiations that extracted every bit of value that the company was willing to put into it.... Sick leave was the Company’s number one issue, driven by a 30% increase in sick leave use by the Delta pilots since C2012. Simply put, without addressing this issue, there was no path to an agreement... Social media is a poor source of accurate information... and compromised where we had to reach an agreement... we believe that there is little upside potential by rejecting this agreement... With over a billion dollars in improvements on the table, there is significant risk, with little likelihood of achieving more... |
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1910007)
For those who didn't read that whole council 44 update, here's all you need to see to understand the views of amateur negotiators:
Carl That's $80k/pilot I'm not seeing it. Or is it over the life of the contract so 27000/pilot per year theoretically... Still not seeing it. |
Scope: Total aircraft at the connection carriers will drop from 450 to 425; a 5.6% reduction and the total number of seats at the connection carriers will drop by 2%. Additionally, the block hour ratio between mainline to DCI will be improved from 1.56 to 1.81. The improvement in the block hour ratio is the most significant change, which protects Delta mainline flying. The improvement in the block hour ratio means that the mainline must grow by 50 aircraft to get the 25 extra 76 seat jets. The ratio ensures that the E190 aircraft are mainline growth aircraft, not simply replacement jets for existing aircraft. If Delta were to shrink, so must the connection carriers. For every two EMB190 aircraft that come into mainline service, Delta can add 1 (70/76 seat) regional jet to DCI, up to a maximum of twenty-five additional 70/76 seat regional jets. Concurrently, Delta must remove two 50-seat regional jets from DCI. This builds on it, slightly better, but notice they didn’t put a baseline when they said “1.81 means that mainline must grow 50 aircraft.” We have 124 more jets to be delivered plus 60 added in this PWA. How does a 184 aircraft only become a 50 jet growth? By parking 134 jets. What’s that? The 88 fleet (116 jets) and then some. We are forever going to be buying and retiring aircraft, what they’re doing is using that natural business process to add larger regional jets to Delta Connection and continue making outsourcing profitable. |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1910065)
The C2012 MBH vs DBH ratio was a concession. Plain and simple.
This builds on it, slightly better, but notice they didn’t put a baseline when they said “1.81 means that mainline must grow 50 aircraft.” We have 124 more jets to be delivered plus 60 added in this PWA. How does a 184 aircraft only become a 50 jet growth? By parking 134 jets. What’s that? The 88 fleet (116 jets) and then some. We are forever going to be buying and retiring aircraft, what they’re doing is using that natural business process to add larger regional jets to Delta Connection and continue making outsourcing profitable. |
FWIW, the ratios in C2012 were a concession over the PWA 2008 language. Plain and simple. A ratio is fine as one of many instruments to protect mainline jobs and move Delta flying back to mainline, but the ratios we got in C2012 were not growth. Just look at today as proof, ALPA says we're at a 1.55 ratio against DCI, the min is 1.35.
That .2 difference means if Delta needed to cut flying, it'd come from our side. And what is .2? It's the entire 88 fleet. So we put the entire 88 fleet up at risk for what gain? 70 more 76-seat regional jets at DCI, which I guess in Moak speak that's a gain for us. |
Originally Posted by scambo1
(Post 1910040)
Has anyone done the math on 1 billion dollars of contract improvements?
That's $80k/pilot I'm not seeing it. Or is it over the life of the contract so 27000/pilot per year theoretically... Still not seeing it. |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1910065)
The C2012 MBH vs DBH ratio was a concession. Plain and simple.
This builds on it, slightly better, but notice they didn’t put a baseline when they said “1.81 means that mainline must grow 50 aircraft.” We have 124 more jets to be delivered plus 60 added in this PWA. How does a 184 aircraft only become a 50 jet growth? By parking 134 jets. What’s that? The 88 fleet (116 jets) and then some. We are forever going to be buying and retiring aircraft, what they’re doing is using that natural business process to add larger regional jets to Delta Connection and continue making outsourcing profitable. Carl |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:28 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands