Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)
-   -   Sick leave analysis (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/92080-sick-leave-analysis.html)

LOBO 12-09-2015 12:21 AM

Looking for some math help
 
The company said from '08 to '11 - the sick leave rate was 6.1%

Then over the next 3 years it rose to a rate of 7.8%

I know January is one of the three lowest months on block hours (per the same news letter "January is typically the third lowest month when measuring the daily volume of flying.")

Looking at the chart they put out I guesstimated around 561,000 block hours for the month of January (is this a good number?)

6.1% of 561,000 is 34,221 and
7.8% of 561,000 is 43,758

The difference between the two is 9537 hours.

I'm not sure how they got to a 22,250 average increase in sick leave from these numbers.



Crew Resources show your work or you don't get credit!!!!

Big E 757 12-09-2015 02:47 AM


Originally Posted by Timbo (Post 2023937)
That's a GREAT idea!

In response to all this 'sick leave abuse' nonsense, DALPA should run the 'cost' numbers, if every pilot were to use every minute of sick leave available per our contract, every year, and then run the numbers on what the pilot group actually uses.

Take the difference and throw it in the company's face, tell them;

"Look, the Pilot Group is SAVING YOU $XX MILLION every year in Unused Sick Leave! You can either add that value to our next TA, or you can write each pilot a check each June 1, for his unused sick leave,

OR...you can Shut The Phuck UP about this 'sick leave abuse' nonsesnse!

It DOESN'T EXIST!"


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That is what should have been done a long time ago. JM: "Excuse me, Captain Dickson, this is how much negotiating capital we use every contract to keep our 240 hours of sick time $xx,xxx,xxx. We only use on average,$x,xxx,xxx." "You are making money because we aren't exercising the full benefit of our sick leave policy."

How many guys have called the company and said instead of the 15% DC contribution, I only want you to give me 6% this year. I'll give the other 9 percent back because I didn't need it this year?

Phuz 12-09-2015 06:14 AM


Originally Posted by Big E 757 (Post 2024267)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That is what should have been done a long time ago. JM: "Excuse me, Captain Dickson, this is how much negotiating capital we use every contract to keep our 240 hours of sick time $xx,xxx,xxx. We only use on average,$x,xxx,xxx." "You are making money because we aren't exercising the full benefit of our sick leave policy."

How many guys have called the company and said instead of the 15% DC contribution, I only want you to give me 6% this year. I'll give the other 9 percent back because I didn't need it this year?

Bravo. Negotiated benefit - end of story.

OldFlyGuy 12-09-2015 06:51 AM


Originally Posted by Turbo1 (Post 2024206)
Frankly I'm shocked that alpa said anything. Now how about backing that up with restorative action about the current draconian requirements. It sometimes takes an act of congress just to get an appt with a doctor to absolve myself about a condition which is weeks passed. ***?

You need a new doctor. I send my Doc an electronic note or phone the office and his staff writes an electronic response. I personally find it offensive to get a note from the Doc, but it isn't the end of the world. As near as I can tell we get more annual sick leave than anyone and we need to protect it. OFG

Purple Drank 12-09-2015 06:52 AM

The problem is, the company charges us X in negotiating capital for sick leave.

They then expect to actually pay out X minus [a lot] by making it as difficult as they can to use X.

This is where a striong union is required. We need to push back against the company short-changing us on a negotiated benefit.

The more the company harps in this, the more desperate (weak) they seem, and the more we realize we need to improve our contractual protections--not weaken them.

notEnuf 12-09-2015 07:09 AM

Wow. That worked.

Type A pilots rushing to put out a fire. Or at least pointing and yelling fire.

Reintroduce the "sick leave abuse" narrative right before we are to return to the negotiating table. Distract and try to create leverage for concessions by making the union manage "new data" and respond to the pilots calls for a rebuttal. Distraction much. Sounds like the "windshear in the area" brief right before the V1 cut. Was windshear really ever the threat?

BobZ 12-09-2015 07:20 AM

Not speakum wise words.....

ATL7ER 12-09-2015 07:48 AM

$9 BILLION in VOLUNTARY stock buybacks and dividends from 2013 thru end of 2017. link

$48 Million in sick leave expense = 0.53% of $9 Billion. Just over half of 1%

KMA Delta.

trustbutverify 12-09-2015 08:28 AM


Originally Posted by LOBO (Post 2024239)
The company said from '08 to '11 - the sick leave rate was 6.1%

Then over the next 3 years it rose to a rate of 7.8%

I know January is one of the three lowest months on block hours (per the same news letter "January is typically the third lowest month when measuring the daily volume of flying.")

Looking at the chart they put out I guesstimated around 561,000 block hours for the month of January (is this a good number?)

6.1% of 561,000 is 34,221 and
7.8% of 561,000 is 43,758

The difference between the two is 9537 hours.

I'm not sure how they got to a 22,250 average increase in sick leave from these numbers.



Crew Resources show your work or you don't get credit!!!!

I also wonder if dead head hours were included in their block hour totals. On all my rotations and in the iCrew time card, dead head hours are not included in my block hours totals. I personally have been flying more dead head hours and see more dead heads in the bid package in recent years. If in fact the company has been dead heading pilots more and not counting those hours in the block hour tally, then there's more reason to call B.S. on their propaganda.

Hank Kingsley 12-09-2015 09:17 AM

Pretty transparent attempt to bypass the union on their number one must have item. Next will be publishing W-2's of the most senior FO's. Industrial psych. 101.

They need to extract productivity in order to give payraises. Nice try, Bastian and Campbell are pulling out all the tricks.

newKnow 12-09-2015 09:20 AM


Originally Posted by OldFlyGuy (Post 2024387)
You need a new doctor. I send my Doc an electronic note or phone the office and his staff writes an electronic response. I personally find it offensive to get a note from the Doc, but it isn't the end of the world. As near as I can tell we get more annual sick leave than anyone and we need to protect it. OFG

Let Turbo make his own choice about who his doctor should be.

If the same oppressive sick leave language is in the next TA, we need to choose who our union should be.

UGBSM 12-09-2015 11:29 AM


Originally Posted by capncrunch (Post 2023130)
Best I can tell, the pilots are being stand up guys and not calling in sick on the holidays. Seems to me that things are perfectly fine.

By the way, exactly who is it that flies on the holidays? Is it our older, more senior pilots? Or is it the younger, more junior pilots?

So why is it such a surprise that sick leave goes down on the holidays? Crew resources should be smart enough to figure that out without any graphs or charts.

capncrunch 12-09-2015 11:34 AM


Originally Posted by OldFlyGuy (Post 2024387)
You need a new doctor. I send my Doc an electronic note or phone the office and his staff writes an electronic response. I personally find it offensive to get a note from the Doc, but it isn't the end of the world. As near as I can tell we get more annual sick leave than anyone and we need to protect it. OFG

Sick abuse is a red herring and NO, we do not need to get new doctors to accommodate the company's BS.

Any adjustment to sick leave, unless they give us more unverified, is an auto NO vote for me. I'm not going to move an inch.

We already gave the company the sick policy they "had to have" on the last contract. It's time for our must haves.

OldFlyGuy 12-09-2015 02:54 PM


Originally Posted by capncrunch (Post 2024590)
Sick abuse is a red herring and NO, we do not need to get new doctors to accommodate the company's BS.

Any adjustment to sick leave, unless they give us more unverified, is an auto NO vote for me. I'm not going to move an inch.

We already gave the company the sick policy they "had to have" on the last contract. It's time for our must haves.

Problem with posts vs face to face... Did I suggest changing the sick leave system in the post? I'm ok with changing some things FOR A PRICE. I agree the "sick abuse" is probably a red herring... Maybe, but I can also imagine Mr A telling SD his division has a $48M problem he needs to fix. That is potential leverage if SD is willing to pay >> $48M to get Mr A off his arse. These dudes are bean counters. Our present sick leave system is hardly "draconian." We get a bunch of sick leave. Being asked for a note occasionally I can live with although I personally find it offensive: this is CURRENT contract . If DAL wants to press the issue I'll call in sick and see a Doc for every sniffle and I'll wind up calling in sick more often and I'll bury them in paperwork. You guys are the ones making a mountain out of a mole hill and you are the ones being distracted. I'll revise my statement: And I'm talking about the current contract under which we occasionally have to verify sick leave. Keep your Doc, BUT if MY doctor couldn't have his/her staff produce a simple BS note for DL I'd change Docs that day. OFG

Army80 12-09-2015 03:28 PM


Originally Posted by OldFlyGuy (Post 2024719)
Problem with posts vs face to face... Did I suggest changing the sick leave system in the post? I'm ok with changing some things FOR A PRICE. I agree the "sick abuse" is probably a red herring... Maybe, but I can also imagine Mr A telling SD his division has a $48M problem he needs to fix. That is potential leverage if SD is willing to pay >> $48M to get Mr A off his arse. These dudes are bean counters. Our present sick leave system is hardly "draconian." We get a bunch of sick leave. Being asked for a note occasionally I can live with although I personally find it offensive: this is CURRENT contract . If DAL wants to press the issue I'll call in sick and see a Doc for every sniffle and I'll wind up calling in sick more often and I'll bury them in paperwork. You guys are the ones making a mountain out of a mole hill and you are the ones being distracted. I'll revise my statement: And I'm talking about the current contract under which we occasionally have to verify sick leave. Keep your Doc, BUT if MY doctor couldn't have his/her staff produce a simple BS note for DL I'd change Docs that day. OFG

Do you think you will ever be successful enough in life to be able to not have to behave like a stockboy at Walmart?

I know we are grown ups that wear a uniform with a name tag and short sleeve shirt with a tie, so I guess it sort of makes sense.

Dignity is so over rated....

BlaneO 12-09-2015 03:44 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Uh, hey folks, from the flight deck, uh, we're just finishing our drinks up here and we'll be pushing back shortly.

Army80 12-09-2015 03:51 PM

Remember, we "set the tone".

The "welcome mat" tone needs to stop.

iceman49 12-09-2015 05:28 PM


Originally Posted by OldFlyGuy (Post 2024719)
Problem with posts vs face to face... Did I suggest changing the sick leave system in the post? I'm ok with changing some things FOR A PRICE. I agree the "sick abuse" is probably a red herring... Maybe, but I can also imagine Mr A telling SD his division has a $48M problem he needs to fix. That is potential leverage if SD is willing to pay >> $48M to get Mr A off his arse. These dudes are bean counters. Our present sick leave system is hardly "draconian." We get a bunch of sick leave. Being asked for a note occasionally I can live with although I personally find it offensive: this is CURRENT contract . If DAL wants to press the issue I'll call in sick and see a Doc for every sniffle and I'll wind up calling in sick more often and I'll bury them in paperwork. You guys are the ones making a mountain out of a mole hill and you are the ones being distracted. I'll revise my statement: And I'm talking about the current contract under which we occasionally have to verify sick leave. Keep your Doc, BUT if MY doctor couldn't have his/her staff produce a simple BS note for DL I'd change Docs that day. OFG

This is and has been one of RAs issues, he brought it from NWA and I would imagine that was a carry over from Continental. I had approx 2200 hours sick leave and knew numerous others that had like accumulations. It was not abused but looked at as an insurance policy...it was payed out at 80 hours a month. During the merger we exchanged the hours for DPMA premiums...oh boy, and top off.
This just looks like a regurgitated argument.

Gunfighter 12-09-2015 06:57 PM

Crew resources seems to be worried about the dips in the sick leave chart on the exact date of the holidays. Should I help out by calling in sick on the 25th and the 1st?

BobZ 12-10-2015 06:43 AM

Here, here, now..... we will have no outside of the box thinking around this place...,:)

OldFlyGuy 12-10-2015 07:15 AM


Originally Posted by iceman49 (Post 2024800)
This is and has been one of RAs issues, he brought it from NWA and I would imagine that was a carry over from Continental. I had approx 2200 hours sick leave and knew numerous others that had like accumulations. It was not abused but looked at as an insurance policy...it was payed out at 80 hours a month. During the merger we exchanged the hours for DPMA premiums...oh boy, and top off.
This just looks like a regurgitated argument.

NWA folks with big sick leave banks got screwed. Period. Corporate Bean Counting and abuse of employees at its finest. Then offering 100 hrs per year unverified... and not expecting it to be used...? That was seriously stupid. Now if they want to fix it they pay a premium that we can verify. Or they can live with it. JMO, OFG

Boatbuilder 12-10-2015 07:15 AM


Originally Posted by RockyBoy (Post 2023290)
Ah crap. Now I've gotta sell my F-350 Diesel airport truck AND call in sick over holidays? I'm moving to Syria where the taxes are low.

So you are the guy taking up 4 parking spots! ;)

TexanDriver 02-06-2016 05:23 AM

Anyone see the most recent newsletter about SL? Man, they are really trying to make a point. I bet there will be a blurb about SL in every newsletter from here on out.

Hank Kingsley 02-06-2016 06:00 AM


Originally Posted by TexanDriver (Post 2063840)
Anyone see the most recent newsletter about SL? Man, they are really trying to make a point. I bet there will be a blurb about SL in every newsletter from here on out.

Yup, we should hang that next to the SEC filing awarding stock to the management team.

gzsg 02-06-2016 06:17 AM

I'd be happy to fly when I'm sick if management would write me a note saying that I have their permission. Until that day, it is a violation of federal law.

Pushing pilots to fly sick is fraught with risk. Should we have a fatal crash where one of the pilots was flying sick because of this intimidation the resulting lawsuits will cost Delta Billions.

The entire goal of this actions is to intimidate weak pilots to fly sick.

Bean counters know nothing about what we do.

They made a mistake and get a paper cut. We make a mistake and ............

EGTrise 02-06-2016 06:44 AM


Originally Posted by iceman49 (Post 2024800)
This is and has been one of RAs issues, he brought it from NWA and I would imagine that was a carry over from Continental. I had approx 2200 hours sick leave and knew numerous others that had like accumulations. It was not abused but looked at as an insurance policy...it was payed out at 80 hours a month. During the merger we exchanged the hours for DPMA premiums...oh boy, and top off.
This just looks like a regurgitated argument.

Yeah, I did the math and figured the break-even time frame for that POS trade was about 300 years. I call in sick when I am sick. Every time.

Gunfighter 02-06-2016 10:26 AM

Tomorrow is one of the sickest days of the year. It would be a shame if we came in under the average due to pressure from management.

capncrunch 02-06-2016 10:47 AM


Originally Posted by TexanDriver (Post 2063840)
Anyone see the most recent newsletter about SL? Man, they are really trying to make a point. I bet there will be a blurb about SL in every newsletter from here on out.

Managements issue with SL is a red herring and they are using it to distract us from asking for what we deserve.

We are currently under the SL policy they "had to have" in 2012. I've got no more room to move on SL, they can pound sand as far as I'm concerned.

Purple Drank 02-06-2016 10:59 AM


Originally Posted by capncrunch (Post 2063977)
Managements issue with SL is a red herring and they are using it to distract us from asking for what we deserve.

Bingo.

They don't have any leverage.
So they are trying to invent it by manipulating and cherry picking data that conforms to the story they want to tell.
So much for integrity.

boog123 02-06-2016 11:43 AM


Originally Posted by TexanDriver (Post 2063840)
Anyone see the most recent newsletter about SL? Man, they are really trying to make a point. I bet there will be a blurb about SL in every newsletter from here on out.

I skipped over that section. see above comments

RetiredFTS 02-06-2016 12:10 PM


Originally Posted by Purple Drank (Post 2063981)
Bingo.

They don't have any leverage.
So they are trying to invent it by manipulating and cherry picking data that conforms to the story they want to tell.
So much for integrity.

I like the sick leave by day of the week graph. Where's the block hour by day of the week graph? (Full disclosure...I am currently on SL status.)

Herkflyr 02-06-2016 02:42 PM


Originally Posted by RetiredFTS (Post 2064010)
I like the sick leave by day of the week graph. Where's the block hour by day of the week graph? (Full disclosure...I am currently on SL status.)

You actually read that? I just go all glassy-eyed and then read the newest version of why the 717 has to be ninety percent four and five day trips.

I'm not sure how the Crew Resources newsletter somehow morphed into some proxy for mgmt's obsession with sick leave use.

300SMK 02-06-2016 03:00 PM


Originally Posted by Herkflyr (Post 2064064)
You actually read that? I just go all glassy-eyed and then read the newest version of why the 717 has to be ninety percent four and five day trips.

I'm not sure how the Crew Resources newsletter somehow morphed into some proxy for mgmt's obsession with sick leave use.

It's a negotiated benefit with a cost associated to it. It's actually a contract.

GogglesPisano 02-06-2016 03:03 PM


Originally Posted by Herkflyr (Post 2064064)
You actually read that? I just go all glassy-eyed and then read the newest version of why the 717 has to be ninety percent four and five day trips.

I'm not sure how the Crew Resources newsletter somehow morphed into some proxy for mgmt's obsession with sick leave use.

And 33% 1-day trips in NYC -- the base where everyone's a commuter. Real nice.

We'd like to trade for some of your 4-days.:D

Hank Kingsley 02-06-2016 07:27 PM


Originally Posted by GogglesPisano (Post 2064074)
And 33% 1-day trips in NYC -- the base where everyone's a commuter. Real nice.

We'd like to trade for some of your 4-days.:D

The beatings will continue until morale improves. They did the same thing will the MD88 in NYC twenty years ago. Put them in EWR too. It builds character.

zippinbye 02-06-2016 08:11 PM


Originally Posted by 300SMK (Post 2064072)
It's a negotiated benefit with a cost associated to it. It's actually a contract.

You view sick leave as a benefit, as do I, along the vast majority of our colleagues. However, management views it as a liability that needs to be contained. The entire philosophy of what sick leave amounts to is viewed from diametrically opposing vantage points. I'm no accountant or businessman at heart, but I think sick leave belongs on the same side of the balance sheet as pay. But the financial gurus that lead this company incorrectly see sick leave in an asset column. Each time it's exercised, a loss is tallied in their minds. That's not likely to change. Which is the primary reason to hold a firm line in order to retain management's "ask" from C2012. They demanded it, they got it. Tough luck that the results do not meet their expectations. I compare sick leave to a ratchet. Each time it "tightens," it's a one-way street. Allow a few notches of constraint in exchange for a bit of pay, and it will never move back in pilots' favor. That may not bother some people ever, and others not until the day they need the benefit. Which is what sick leave is, as you stated. A benefit that has consumed significant negotiating capital over the years. Of course, some people will need more than others. Not unlike life insurance, car insurance and other risk management tools. But it's there when you need it. That is, until you trade it away.

Big E 757 02-07-2016 05:17 AM


Originally Posted by zippinbye (Post 2064201)
You view sick leave as a benefit, as do I, along the vast majority of our colleagues. However, management views it as a liability that needs to be contained. The entire philosophy of what sick leave amounts to is viewed from diametrically opposing vantage points. I'm no accountant or businessman at heart, but I think sick leave belongs on the same side of the balance sheet as pay. But the financial gurus that lead this company incorrectly see sick leave in an asset column. Each time it's exercised, a loss is tallied in their minds. That's not likely to change. Which is the primary reason to hold a firm line in order to retain management's "ask" from C2012. They demanded it, they got it. Tough luck that the results do not meet their expectations. I compare sick leave to a ratchet. Each time it "tightens," it's a one-way street. Allow a few notches of constraint in exchange for a bit of pay, and it will never move back in pilots' favor. That may not bother some people ever, and others not until the day they need the benefit. Which is what sick leave is, as you stated. A benefit that has consumed significant negotiating capital over the years. Of course, some people will need more than others. Not unlike life insurance, car insurance and other risk management tools. But it's there when you need it. That is, until you trade it away.


Well said. In my opinion, our contract costs the company $X Billion a year. If they can reduce that liability within the framework of our current CBA, they save money.

In other words, even though the language hasn't changed in over three years, if they can encourage (intimidate) us into using less sick leave with charts in their weekly updates and always keeping an awareness of sick leave abuse in our minds, they save money. They don't even need new language if sick leave usage has gone down over the last year. They are probably winning already.

notEnuf 02-07-2016 06:37 AM

I think they see the use of sick leave expanding with more states allowing family sick leave. This is a huge benefit for households that have children and both parents employed or single parent households. There may be an increased cost in the future due to the expansion. For those with elderly parents needing care and children, this a great benefit which the current language is not able to control.

Our PWA now has a potential to enhance a benefit removing control from management. They have the power to interpret our PWA and if uncontested, set a precedent. With family sick their grip is loosened. They are not satisfied with the loss of control and regular employees having the right to care for their families. The "Delta" family takes precedent regardless of their rhetoric about caring and family.

Laserowner 02-07-2016 06:44 AM


Originally Posted by zippinbye (Post 2064201)
You view sick leave as a benefit, as do I, along the vast majority of our colleagues. However, management views it as a liability that needs to be contained. The entire philosophy of what sick leave amounts to is viewed from diametrically opposing vantage points. I'm no accountant or businessman at heart, but I think sick leave belongs on the same side of the balance sheet as pay. But the financial gurus that lead this company incorrectly see sick leave in an asset column. Each time it's exercised, a loss is tallied in their minds. That's not likely to change. Which is the primary reason to hold a firm line in order to retain management's "ask" from C2012. They demanded it, they got it. Tough luck that the results do not meet their expectations. I compare sick leave to a ratchet. Each time it "tightens," it's a one-way street. Allow a few notches of constraint in exchange for a bit of pay, and it will never move back in pilots' favor. That may not bother some people ever, and others not until the day they need the benefit. Which is what sick leave is, as you stated. A benefit that has consumed significant negotiating capital over the years. Of course, some people will need more than others. Not unlike life insurance, car insurance and other risk management tools. But it's there when you need it. That is, until you trade it away.

I totally agree. Sick leave is part of your PAY. Years ago, we obtained sick leave language in our contract by accepting a lower pay rate. Instead of viewing sick leave used as a cost to be contained, the bean counters should look at unused sick time as a windfall. The Company should thank us for being so damned healthy!:)

WillieNelson 02-07-2016 07:04 AM

Someone told me that Delta forecasts for zero sick leave usage in the budget.

Does anyone know if that's true?


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:10 PM.


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