Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > Delta
That Survey Was Bad: DALPA Needs our Help. >

That Survey Was Bad: DALPA Needs our Help.

Search
Notices

That Survey Was Bad: DALPA Needs our Help.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-06-2015, 09:09 AM
  #71  
Runs with scissors
 
Timbo's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,722
Default

Remember during C12K negotiations, SD told us they would start hiring right away if we voted yes?

Remember what happened next?

They waited a YEAR to start hiring! They said it was because they wanted the fourth quarter earnings numbers to be huge, so they could get listed on the S+P 500.

That was THEIR CHOICE, it was a Business Decision, THEY made, KNOWING they would be SHORT of pilots going forward.

THEY DID IT ANYWAY.

Any pilot shortage today is a result of their business decision. They were focused on running the stock price up, because they get paid in stock. They made Millions on that decision.

Well, it's payback time.
Timbo is offline  
Old 12-06-2015, 12:58 PM
  #72  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
newKnow's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
Default

Originally Posted by Flamer View Post
Let's take care of the people here first. Then worry about the people that want to be here later. And for F's sake, let's quit trying to solve company created problems.
It seems to me that when you are negotiating against someone that has problems, you are in a stronger position.


TA2015 solved all of the company's problems, in the manner in which they wanted them to be solved. What made it even worse it we got almost nothing in return.


The script has to be flipped the next time.
newKnow is offline  
Old 12-06-2015, 01:18 PM
  #73  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,117
Default

Originally Posted by Timbo View Post
Remember during C12K negotiations, SD told us they would start hiring right away if we voted yes?

Remember what happened next?

They waited a YEAR to start hiring! They said it was because they wanted the fourth quarter earnings numbers to be huge, so they could get listed on the S+P 500.

That was THEIR CHOICE, it was a Business Decision, THEY made, KNOWING they would be SHORT of pilots going forward.

THEY DID IT ANYWAY.

Any pilot shortage today is a result of their business decision. They were focused on running the stock price up, because they get paid in stock. They made Millions on that decision.

Well, it's payback time.
I remember in 2001 when Plato Rhyne said we were going to hire 60 a month for the forseeable future.....oddly, the "foreseeable future" ended about 2 months later when we inked C2K.

Until it's a done deal, it ain't a done deaL....
FL370esq is offline  
Old 12-06-2015, 03:47 PM
  #74  
Runs with scissors
 
Timbo's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,722
Default

Yup, but my point is, the company made a decision to -not- hire for a year, to bump up the stock price, so they could sell their shares and make millions.

Now they have a pilot shortage?

Not our problem, it's their problem.
Timbo is offline  
Old 12-06-2015, 03:59 PM
  #75  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,117
Default

Originally Posted by Timbo View Post
Now they have a pilot shortage?

Not our problem, it's their problem.
Agree completely. Not our job to "fix" manning issues, especially ones caused by the company's negligence.
FL370esq is offline  
Old 12-06-2015, 04:52 PM
  #76  
Runs with scissors
 
Timbo's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,722
Default

It wasn't company negligence, it was corporate greed.

They were so sure we would agree to give up the LCA trip drops, they made the decision to NOT hire.

Now I hope they have to pay out about a zillion greenslips to cover the flying they decided not to hire for.
Timbo is offline  
Old 12-06-2015, 05:22 PM
  #77  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,117
Default

Originally Posted by Timbo View Post
It wasn't company negligence, it was corporate greed.
Minor point but corporate greed was the motive, negligence was the result. Torts text books are littered with negligence litigation initiated because of corporate greed (i.e., cutting corners with adverse results). But for the company wanting to save money by cutting corners, [x] would not have occured.
FL370esq is offline  
Old 12-06-2015, 05:31 PM
  #78  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
newKnow's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
Default

Originally Posted by FL370esq View Post
Minor point but corporate greed was the motive, negligence was the result. Torts text books are littered with negligence litigation initiated because of corporate greed (i.e., cutting corners with adverse results). But for the company wanting to save money by cutting corners, [x] would not have occured.
Res ipsa loquitur.
newKnow is offline  
Old 12-07-2015, 08:03 AM
  #79  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Position: Sitting
Posts: 68
Default

Originally Posted by FL370esq View Post
Minor point but corporate greed was the motive, negligence was the result. Torts text books are littered with negligence litigation initiated because of corporate greed (i.e., cutting corners with adverse results). But for the company wanting to save money by cutting corners, [x] would not have occured.
It would be difficult to make a negligence argument here. I agree with Timbo, it was plain greed. Whatever the case, it had repercussions that they want us to fix.
Dynamohum is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
newKnow
Delta
27
06-19-2015 04:29 PM
SebastianDesoto
Regional
14
03-08-2014 06:06 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices