3B4 Kiss at midnight
 

Delta management has attempted to circumvent raises to pilots directed in 3.B.4. Their temporary success is due to their deliberate manipulation of the timing of raises given to non-pilot employees. The PWA language as written allows them the ability to change the timing of the trigger event to management's advantage. However the language as written also provides an 18 month rolling look back. The 3.B.4. provision can be delayed and manipulated but can not be avoided. Every raise in the 18 months following December 1, 2015 now includes the percentage of employees effected on December 1. This percentage will always exceed the 30% required to trigger a review. This means every raise in the next 18 months will also trigger a review. Most importantly the satisfaction of conditions to trigger a review are not limited by frequency or previous triggers.


3.B.4. Trigger:
“If, during any consecutive rolling 18-month period, the Company grants an across-the-board increase in base pay rates to non-pilot U.S.-based workgroups covering 30% or more of its non-pilot U.S.-based workforce, then a review of pilot composite hourly rates will be triggered.”

3.B.4. Next trigger date:
The next increase in base pay rates to a non-pilot U.S. based work group will be the dispatcher contractual raise in the PAFCA contract.
On the date of the PAFCA contractual raise there will have been an across-the-board increase in base pay rates to non-pilot U.S.-based workgroups covering 30% or more (nearly 100%) of its non-pilot U.S.-based workforce within the preceding 18 months. The fulfillment of the language specific conditions will trigger a review of pilot composite hourly rates.


3.B.4. Review:
“If, as a result of that review, it is determined that, as of the date the review was triggered, the Delta top-of-scale 757 Captain composite hourly rate is less than 100% of the average of the top-of-scale 757 Captain hourly domestic day rates at United and American, the pilot composite hourly rates will be increased (except as 9 provided in Section 3 B. 4. Note). The amount of increase will be the lesser of the percentage difference between the Delta top-of-scale 757 Captain composite hourly rate and 100% of the top-of-scale average 757 Captain hourly domestic day rates at United and American, or the average percentage increase (except as provided in Section 3 B. 4. Note) granted to the non-pilot U.S.-based workgroups of the Company. Any percentage increase due the pilots will be effective as of the date of the increase that triggered the review.”

3.B.4. Next review:
As of January 1, 2016 the review of pay rates will provide a 3% pay increase under the current United and American contracts. However, if United ratifies an agreement that moves their composite rate substantially higher, then the review would provide an increase of either the average increase of the non-pilot raises or the increase to the industry average rate, whichever is less. The result of a United ratification before the PAFCA trigger date could result in as much as a 14.5% pay rate increase if the Delta employee portion of the comparison is the lessor value. Any ratification after the PAFCA pay increase allows for an increase the following year if it is still within 18 months. The comparison is made each time another review is triggered.



3.B.4. From PWA:
If, during any consecutive rolling 18-month period, the Company grants an across-the-board increase in base pay rates to non-pilot U.S.-based workgroups covering 30% or more of its non-pilot U.S.-based workforce, then a review of pilot composite hourly rates will be triggered. If, as a result of that review, it is determined that, as of the date the review was triggered, the Delta top-of-scale 757 Captain composite hourly rate is less than 100% of the average of the top-of-scale 757 Captain hourly domestic day rates at United and American, the pilot composite hourly rates will be increased (except as provided in Section 3 B. 4. Note). The amount of increase will be the lesser of the percentage difference between the Delta top-of-scale 757 Captain composite hourly rate and 100% of the top-of-scale average 757 Captain hourly domestic day rates at United and American, or the average percentage increase (except as provided in Section 3 B. 4. Note) granted to the non-pilot U.S.-based workgroups of the Company. Any percentage increase due the pilots will be effective as of the date of the increase that triggered the review.
Note: Base pay rates for non-pilot U.S. – based workgroups will only be considered to have increased to the extent they exceed the rates in effect on July 1, 2012. Should an increase for non-pilot U.S.-based workgroups exceed the base pay rates in effect on July 1, 2012, then only the percentage by which such an increase exceeds the applicable July 1, 2012, base pay rates will be considered in the calculation of the percentage increase that may be applied to pilot composite hourly rates.

The dispatchers are unionized and have a contract? Were they not not already included in the 14.5% raise on Dec 1? Do you know when they are due this "contractual" raise?

Ratification vote of the United TA ends Jan 22. Is the raise before or after that?

This could work out ok for us. However I have several questions. Do the dispatchers comprise 30% of the US based non pilot workforce? If yes, then the other part of the review stands out to me,

"The amount of increase will be the lesser of the percentage difference between the Delta top-of-scale 757 Captain composite hourly rate and 100% of the top-of-scale average 757 Captain hourly domestic day rates at United and American, or the average percentage increase (except as provided in Section 3 B. 4. Note) granted to the non-pilot U.S.-based workgroups of the Company."

Hmmm, there is that OR between United and American. Also there is the last segment of "non-pilot workgroups".

So the way I read it is that when this review occurs we could get an increase equal to that groups increase. Or does that also include the rest of the non-pilot workgroups?

I guess I would have to read the note to 3B4.

I just read in the council 44 update that we ended up getting a .5 percent raise on December 1, 2015 thanks to this section. First I had heard of this. Hardly earth shattering. Next year though it will probably be closer to 5-6 percent assuming Delta gives the other groups raises again.

I recommend a more careful reading of both the C44 Hotline and Section 3 B.4.


The Hotline stated that the December 1 pay raise will be 0.05% (zero point zero five).


Section 3 B.4 provides for a "lesser" value of the two figures that are involved in the evaluation after a trigger event.

You're right. Just glanced. .5, .05; honestly, both percentages are so small that they are insignificant kind of like our per diem increase for the failed TA.

Yeah, not quite what we were sold during ratification by our reps. "Any raises granted to more than 30% of our fellow employees will be matched for us, up to 3% annually." I guess I should have read the fine print.

"Read the fine print?"
Are you claiming to be a "no" voter? GMAB.

Don't remember my reps saying that. Guess you should know your contract better....

Denny

Nope, just a victim of misinformation put out regarding what we could expect from 3B4.

It's a quote from a joint comm piece put out by some of the reps.

A quote eh? How about posting the whole thing with context?

Go look it up yourself, it's available on the council websites, then you can spin it anyway you want, but it doesn't change the fact that we aint getting the 3%, not even close.

I don't remember that quote either...you sure?

It was widely put out that the company could avoid any 3B4 raise by granting a raise to the other employees prior to 1 Jan 16. Had the raise been after 31 Dec there would have been a 3% raise matching the 3% AA and UAL were getting. I would expect the company to pay a bonus in 2017 instead of a raise to avoid 3B4 again.

I'm going to let you post it here with context. We're all waiting.

Sorry, no more revisionist history! Here's the excerpt he won't post from the joint letter. Source: C1 update July 6, 2015

What If YOU Say “No”?

The initial 8% hourly pay increase in the TA is significantly offset by the JV production balance, sick leave, and productivity concessions. Next year, the 6% is almost totally offset by the profit sharing conversion (assuming a PTIX of at least $6 billion), but we get about 1% more in vacation and training pay. Any raises granted to more than 30% of our fellow employees will be matched for us, up to 3% annually. In all, we realistically stand to not realize the initial net increase and probably not much more, if any.

With no change to the PWA, management will continue to be out of compliance with the AF JV production balance. Their issues with DCI will only grow. The PS they pay to the other employees will only grow. Their staffing issues will only grow.

To say that this is the most favorable negotiating environment would be an understatement. No other airline in the history of aviation has produced the profits that Delta is now producing. Think about the whole TA that you will be voting on. Draw your own conclusions.

Should you reject this TA, we would propose to reengage with Mr. Anderson at the earliest opportunity as truly equal partners in search of more suitable ways and means by which to strengthen the company’s business model and our role within that model. Our mutual goal should be to further enhance the standing that Delta Air Lines enjoys atop the airline, indeed within the overall transport, industry.

In closing, we would like to thank everyone involved in the effort put forth thus far in crafting this TA. All of those involved have worked very hard in getting us to this point. We look forward to reconvening with our colleagues on the MEC to discuss our next steps, however you decide.

Fraternally,

Council 1 Captain Jon Lewis, Chairman First Officer Eric Hall, Vice Chairman
Council 20 Captain Bill Bartels, Chairman First Officer Rich Wheeler, Vice Chairman Captain Tom Bell, Secretary-Treasurer Council 54 Captain Jud Crane, Chairman First Officer Roger Goodwin, SecretaryTreasurer Council 66 Captain Tom Brielmann, Chairman First Officer Chris Hazleton, Vice Chairman Council 108 First Officer Ryan Schnitzler, Vice Chairman

It's in context as posted. If you don't think so, look it up yourself.

Hmmm. Let's look at that Joint Comm NotEnuf was kind enough to dig up and the rebuttal.

C-1 Joint Comm:

“Any raises granted to more than 30% of our fellow employees will be matched for us, up to 3% annually.”


Contrails Rebuttal:

"This claim is misleading. Triggers for raises under Section 3 B.4. are easily avoided by giving a raise later this year, prior to any AMR/UAL increase in pay, and replacing pay raises with bonuses or lump-sum payments starting in 2016. Section 3 B.5., that addresses bonuses to other employees, expires in our current PWA on December 31, 2015."

In think the rebuttal was more accurate then the sales job from C1.

Question is, who vetted that joint comm?

*************************
The initial 8% hourly pay increase in the TA is significantly offset by the JV production balance, sick leave, and productivity concessions. Next year, the 6% is almost totally offset by the profit sharing conversion (assuming a PTIX of at least $6 billion), but we get about 1% more in vacation and training pay. Any raises granted to more than 30% of our fellow employees will be matched for us, up to 3% annually. In all, we realistically stand to not realize the initial net increase and probably not much more, if any.

Council 1 Captain Jon Lewis, Chairman First Officer Eric Hall, Vice Chairman
Council 20 Captain Bill Bartels, Chairman First Officer Rich Wheeler, Vice Chairman Captain Tom Bell, Secretary-Treasurer Council 54 Captain Jud Crane, Chairman First Officer Roger Goodwin, SecretaryTreasurer Council 66 Captain Tom Brielmann, Chairman First Officer Chris Hazleton, Vice Chairman Council 108 First Officer Ryan Schnitzler, Vice Chairman
**************************

After the TA failed, the Negotiating Committee Chairman challenged any of those named at the bottom of this statement to provide proof of the speculative financial impact analysis and not a single one of them could give an explanation based on facts. Several of them were asked during their own LEC meetings to provide the proof and, again, they could not.

The only defense they had was their admission that the statement was provided by a third party and none of them had come up with this analysis, but they believed it to be true, nonetheless, and published it.

It was a pure conjecture and it was published by this group in an effort to bolster the vote against the TA.

Hey Chuck,

How's Alpa nationals?

Your statement is misleading. The assertion made is forward looking and therefore unprovable. You are clinging to a TA that extended and added concessions.

Your defense of the indefensible is sad.

There was plenty of time to debate the last TA since it was produced so quickly. But Donatelli would never have allowed it. In fact, he blew a gasket at the first road show. We all know the tactics used by the last Chairman. Police, black shirts, etc.

Had MD allowed dissent, the TA never would have seen the light of day. And there's a good chance we'd have a contract right now. Look in the mirror Dalpa, this isn't North Korea.

At the time this was published the argument of avoiding 3B4 raises was a threat and outside of standard practice. Where would that threat originate? Would it be from management or the group pushing the TA?

The 3% is well known now and was not as well known by the entire pilot group at the time. The joint letter was accurate and informative. The calculation was based on the Jan. 1. Industry average calculation from 3B4.

If the source of this threat was management, it was passed on as fact and used to threaten the NO voters instead of being explained and vetted. If the source of the threat was our own MEC, then it is divisive and manipulative. Which is it?

Ok Chuck,

If not 8%, what was the value ALPA placed on the concessions for JV production balance, sick, LCA trip pulls etc? The rebuttal never assigned a number. Given the excellent foresight on 3B4, they must have seen JV being a huge value now that we are soon to own 49% of AeroMexico and have a board seat on China Eastern and GOL. Also an increased stake and credit backing facility with GOL guaranteeing their debt.

And the 1E9 debacle is truly evident. You were being lead by the nose by management. They fed you the arguments and you ran with it instead of doing your own due diligence. Then the MEC chairman (and the Yes voters) decided to go all in with the hard sell when the tough questions came.

What was the value of the concessions again?

That there is some incredible spin. You must have a part time job as JJs spinmeister.

Just admit it. The information put out in that Joint Comm was misleading and a fabrication. Because if your vote was determined by those fabrications, then you cast an uninformed vote.

Here's another misleading fabrication:

Joint Comm:

“Between the hourly pay increase and reduced profit sharing payout from 2016, the average pilot will realize a cut in total 2017 compensation of some 2% below his 2016 earnings under current PTIX projections, and his 2018 earnings will be only 1% above that of 2016.”

Rebuttal:

"This is a complete fabrication. Whoever wrote this is trimming the facts to fit their agenda. This faulty analysis fails to take into account the two past changes in pay rates in 2015 combined with the TA pay rate changes."

You would have earned increasing pay every year over the status quo with the TA, regardless of PTIX.

The pilot group as a whole lost $113.4 million in contractual value from July 1st-December 31st. We made 8% less for the last 6 months of 2015, therefore our slice of PS pie is smaller and when determining our FLT and Advance pay to enter into determining our February PS, well that's less too. IOW, we will have a smaller PS check this year. Oh yeah, I'm also making 14.5% less this year until we get another deal, whenever that may be.

Don't worry, the authors of the joint comm promised that they would immediately reengage. Going on 7 months now without a pay raise and counting.

Those valuations you are talking about that offset the pay were a fabrication. Not at all produced by ALPA. At the September special meeting, in open session, the author of the "it's really only 4%" admitted that he was using back of the napkin math on numbers that he figured himself. Not a single rep could explain how $113.4m over 6 months equals 4%. You were lied to, you apparently bought into the lie hook line and sinker, and then cast an uniformed vote. Bravo!!!

Our negotiating committee brought forward pretty close to what the non contracts received. But over 3 years. The TA looked like management wrote it. So the majority voted no.

Why is last TA still a topic of discussion? It's dead and gone no matter which way you voted or why. How about the next one, any response at all from company yet??

I am still not getting answers.

What was the value, if any ALPA assigned to the concessions?

Who requested the 1E9 language ALPA or management?

Who originated the threat of 3B4 avoidance ALPA or management?

Your refusal to answer speaks volumes. We are all aware of the 8% we are missing how much have we retained by not giving concessions? Is 3B4 still in effect?

The next meeting with the NC and the company is 29 January.

Scoop

Going on 7 months now without those draconian concessions and neutered PS formula.

Work rule giveaways never come back. As the pilot group shifts away from baby boomers, you and the rest of the management and ALPA national toadies had damn well better understand younger generations place a much higher value on QOL than straight rates.

And remember, the top rate applies to what, less than 600 out of 13000 pilots?

The company committed to a response in January. They are waiting to the last business day of the month. They are putting zero effort into the negotiations and intend to drag it out as long as possible. Plan and act accordingly.

The initial 8% raise was offset by some concessions that would probably be quantified in the 1-2% range. To state that the 1/1/16 6% raise would be totally offset by the Profit Sharing giveback is inaccurate. The PS plan was untouched for the 2016 earnings year with a normal payout in February 2017. So for the 2016 earnings year, there would have been a 6% raise on earnings NOT offset by PS reductions.

However, in 2017, the PS reductions would have taken effect, virtually eliminating the 6% 2016 raise. This combined with the 2017 raise of 3% would have actually yielded a paycut for 2017 vs. 2016.

It really matters not, as the proposed TA was rejected overwhelmingly. The Negotiating Committee has put forward a proposal with substantially more value for the Delta pilots.

Jim Villers
P2P Chairman

Plus 1 Drank!

You really have a low view of how informed we are as a pilot group. I personally don't care if we made 8% lower rates. It was more than made up for by losing the concessions.

Spilt milk.

Bottom line.... the failed TA was sorely lacking in both value and equity.

Fortunately.... and in spite of the determined efforts of our very expensive CBA ...the majority of the pilot group was not convinced otherwise.

While our CBA operatives may now express the opinion the present counter represents substantially improved value...... my money is the majority of this group has the perspective it barely reaches the threshold of acceptability.

I believe that to be incorrect- could you provide a quote of the TA language showing that 2016 PS earnings were unaffected by the failed TA?

The Feb 2016 "payout" (for 2015 profits) was untouched by the failed TA, but, as I recall, the "accrual" in 2016, to be paid in Feb 2017 would have been reduced by the failed TA.

-

OK, I found it in the TA language and believe I am correct, that the failed TA would have reduced the formula being used RIGHT NOW, IN 2016, that will be paid out in Feb 2017.

The point of this post is not to gloat, however. A larger issue is --

How could a "P2P Chairman" make such a glaring error? . . . Still trying to sell that old TA, eh?

-

How late do you stay up at night hoping the DAL pilots fail?

Not correct, Jim...TA PS payout was unchanged for this years payout on feb 14, 2016. The 2017 payout would be the first one of the reduced amount.

I really appreciate the reform you're trying to do with P2P, though!