OK, in case nobody has said this yet... it's not all about the pay.

Scope concessions were going to take money out of pilot pay/benefits, reduce pilot opportunities, and reduce future staffing needs.

Sick leave concessions were going to to take money out of pilot pay/benefits, reduce pilot opportunities, and reduce future staffing needs.

OE bidding concessions were going to to take money out of pilot pay/benefits, reduce pilot opportunities, and reduce future staffing needs.

ALV concessions were going to to take money out of pilot pay/benefits, reduce pilot opportunities, and reduce future staffing needs.

Then of course, there were many other Easter eggs. One of my favorites was the side agreement that would transfer ACA excise tax burden from the company to the pilots. Of course, before the vote I was told by DALPA officials that this would affect only a small percentage of pilots (which wasn't true), but in the MEC missive of yesterday they now say it will be every ALPA member by 2022 (which also isn't true, but it makes good rhetoric).

How much were all these concessions going to affect us? We don't know, but I'm betting dollars to donuts that the company's actuarials had a good estimate.

My WAGs for staffing impacts alone were 180 for OE and 120 for ALV. If we prognosticate that Scope and Sick Leave intimidation would each yield a 1% increase in "efficiency/productivity," that's another 240 fewer pilots needed. So maybe around 500 fewer pilots needed because we were going to work harder?

I'm thankful for the older pilots especially who didn't screw the younger/junior ones by prostituting themselves for a pay raise.

 

I'm thankful for the younger pilots who taught us old farts how to use and read social media so the truth could come out. If DALPA had gotten away with disseminating only the information they wanted us to have, this thing would have passed. It was a great team effort across the seniority list and I couldn't be more proud of my fellow Delta pilots.

We have a lot more work to do in order to clean up the huge mess that the church of Moak created and the incompetence of Donatelli has now left us.

Carl

 

Carl, the thread is about fact checking. I know you have read the TA yet you quote in your reply a bunch of incorrect facts. Why?
-ALV is unchanged
-the switch to block hours depending on fleet mix at most will cost us a handful of jobs and may result in a gain. The switch to a 1.81 block hour ratio adds around 720 jobs at 12 crews per domestic airframe.
-the forum states there is zero sick abuse. The changes should therefore have no effect.
-the medical plan change effects only 1 plan. (DPMP used by a small percentage of pilots). It would go into effect only if the plan exceeds the Cadillac tax threshold and every dollar saved has to be returned to the pilots.
-There were job gains in areas not mentioned including training pay and reroute.

 

It's almost as though you want to continuously prove how horrible your comprehension and analysis skills are. I'll let others dismantle you fud. I just don't feel good about doing it anymore.

Carl

 

Let's just take one fact. What was the ALV change.

 

"As part of a one-year test basis Letter of Agreement, the Targeted Line Value (TLV) will increase by 1 hour to 75-81." - not in actual text of TA - it would be in a side LOA. Source: Contrails 19.

1 hr x 9,000 line holders / 77 hrs = ~120 pilots.

Regarding sick leave abuse, I believe the concessions would have caused intimidation for marginally sick pilots to come to work. Personally, I rarely get sick and want to keep it that way. You're often most contagious at the first onset of symptoms, and I don't want someone pushing the line and snarfing in the cockpit while or before I'm there so that I can get sick right when I hit my off days. But those changes would push some to do that, and it probably would help staffing somewhat.

 

You do understand that TLV and ALV are totally different animals. The test to increase TLV was to improve rotation construction. That increases credit hence the extra hour. TLV is simply a target in line construction.

 

Well I guess I didn't understand that, and if so I guess I'm off target.

Notably, a yes-advocating rep and two P2Ps I spoke with about this had the same impression I did - or at least didn't correct me when I asked them directly about it - but said that the company wouldn't use it to reduce staffing. I'm not a big fan of handing over a work rule change and trusting someone go follow the intent without restricting them by the letter.

 

"We don't think they'll do that" is a huge red flag.

 

So in the spirit of fact checking, I went back and read the PWA references for TLV, and you're going to need to explain this to me a bit better. The PWA defines TLV as "“a 12 bid period rolling average of the ALV for a position that will be between 75 and 80 hours (inclusive)."

The only place the PWA references TLV beyond the definition is in the furlough provisions - essentially that if the company furloughs pilots, it can't increase TLV to compensate for the lack of pilots. However, it doesn't restrict the company from raising TLV (within the 75-80hr window) to compensate for slower hiring, and the LOA was going to increase that window.

So, by my read (and yes, I read the whole TA - and most of the changes several times as well as all the Contrails and Notepads. I also talked to two P2Ps directly, conversed with another couple by phone/email/text, and spoke at length with the one yes-vote rep in my council):

- Increasing the TLV would allow the company to increase ALV
- Increased ALV would allow the company to have fewer pilots to staff the same schedule

Tell me where I'm wrong, please.