LOA for initial training pay fixes?
 

Seems like the company and the pilots would mutually benefit immediately if Delta started helping new hires with initial training pay disparity with, say, United. It's quite a bit of cash to get started the first few months in Atlanta with housing cost, uniforms, per diem all on our own. I'm new, so maybe why it's on my mind, but it seems to me a fairly easy thing to adjust so Delta can keep recruits from going to Denver instead...

This is generally seen as a management problem they can easily solve by paying *all the pilots* appropriately, including the new hires. This comes up from time to time when airlines are struggling to staff appropriately, but I hope most of our new hires will make the decision based on something more substantial than a few months of pay disparity.

Since this is one of the few pieces of leverage available to motivate management to increase our pay during negotiations in which nearly every form of self help is unavailable to us, unions generally refuse management offers to raise pay or offer bonuses to new hires without addressing the problem for every pilot on the list.

If I was management and I had a staffing problem, I would prefer an LOA that only raised new hire compensation. For a pilot group to agree to those changes, especially in contract negotiations, would give away good leverage to get a good contract for all.

When Endeavor (Pinnacle and Mesaba) pilots had staffing problems, they secured $23,000/year annual increases for every pilot on the list. So instead of an extra $23,000 for new hires only, every pilot on their list saw a direct increase of $92,000 over 4 years. From a pilot's perspective, that is the best way to negotiate first year compensation issues.

There should be NO LOAs agreed to by DALPA while in section 6 negotiations. If management needs something put it in the TA ( with accompanying gives to the pilots) and allow all of the members to vote on it...
--Management wants to increase pay and benefits to new hires? What are they willing to give up for that?

Training here at United is pretty lucrative. You get three hours of pay per day, regardless if you are working or not. So you either get 90 or 93 hours of pay per month. Depending on whether it's a 30 or 31 day bid month. On top of that, you get rolling per diem, hotels, and uniforms. If DAL is going to compete for pilot candidates, they are definitely going have to pick it up and pay new hires.

The problem in getting management to make a change is that they are having no real issues. They are retaining a high percentages of pilots they make offers to and attrition is extremely low. They won't offer a fix to a problem they don't have.

You are correct, but the real question is - how long until this starts to change?

I believe it is already starting to change. My takeaway after talking to guys from my previous squadron is DAL has already fell from the overwhelming airline of choice to just another one of the Big Three.

Not a bad place to be with thousands of qualified guys chasing jobs, but I wouldn't be surprised if DAL seeks improvements in this area.

Scoop

Absolutely not. I'm as pro new hire as you can get, but we should never allow management targeted pay raises to help alleviate their self induced staffing crisis. In fact, that is one of the few things that will push them to stop burning billions in worthless buybacks and stop dragging their feet abusing the RLA while United and others pass us by.

If I was in management I would try and negotiate first year compensation increases just prior to everyone knowing there was a real issue trying to attract new hires. Hopefully the pilot group would bite and sign off on increases to new hires only so I could solve the future issues before they come to bear.

Just sayin'...

I agree we should make sure our next contract has much better new hire provisions; however, the company needs it and not us. Don't get me wrong, if I had to I'd happily spend negotiating capital to get improved training pay, better year 1 pay, hotels, and uniforms for new hires. In the current competitive market, this should be a company want or at worst a neutral no-cost to the pilots add-on. We start losing the new hire game to AAL and UAL because our intro package stinks, and the company will want to make it happen. We most definitely don't want to do this as an LOA outside of section 6 negotiations. I know it would sound tempting to you now as a new hire, but for the $5k or so of benefit in year 1, you could be throwing away tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars in future earnings.

Short term gains are certainly nice, but in the long run this is a bad idea.

How many pilots have resigned? Better yet, how many have left AMR or UAL or FEDEX to come here? I have the number.

Well aren't you special. Instead of teasing why don't you post the stats????

I don't know about you, but I'm hanging in suspenders....:eek::D

From flt ops:
As for new hire resignations generally, seven of the 446 pilots hired so far in 2016 have resigned (less than 2%). This rate is extremely low and is consistent with the rate we have seen over the past few years.

Thanks, but you're wrong. Anyway, help these new hires out. ALPA normally feels they're an extension of management. Maybe an assessment.

I am not wrong, simply quoted a flight ops pilot letter. However their info is very easy to check. Check up on them and report back how big a lie they are telling!

I agree with most of what your post stated, except this. Why would you afford one iota of negotiating capital to accompany want/need/problem?

My source is deep within Flight Operations, a deep throat so to speak. Crew resources thought enough of the number to mention it, so I'll let that speak for it's self. Cheers.

While on property new hires leaving and training "no shows" is a somewhat emotional issue for those in recruitment, I think both numbers are still pretty low. Even a few gets someone's attention of course, but I'd bet for every new hire that bails for UAL, AA or wherever, its almost always because of bases and for every one we lose we get one from them.

The real metric to watch is one that isn't nearly as easy to measure, and one that we will likely never see the data on in the first place. Its the number of candidates in the "tiers" they value on air apps that either don't take an interview (because they're already hired somewhere else etc) or who interview and get the offer but politely decline well in advance of class (so not a "no show"). For example they will eventually run out of Summa Cum Laude graduates and have to dip in to the Magna Cum Laude pool. What a dark and scary day that will be. :cool:

They will always be able to fill classes. But they've been used to getting everything they want in every applicant they pick. Those days will come to an end and they will have to "lower their standards" for lack of a better term. That will help drive some positive changes, and for others I'm willing to "spend negotiating capital" to make it better for new hires as well. But not as part of a side letter to fix something for the company.

Tell your source he has bad info. It took me 3 minutes just now to verify the companies numbers as anyone with touching brain cells can do. Of course I guess the company could be inserting fictitious numbers into the seniority list to make their numbers correct. They might even be holding those numbers for their sons and daughters years down the road. They will fly them in for the interview in black helicopters!

My meaning was if it was our problem and not a company problem. IE, if the company did not have trouble attracting qualified applicants anyway I'd support negotiating for this.

No. (empty spaces)

It angers me to see the selfishness and singlemindedness of some of our "brothers". If the company was to come to DALPA with an LOA to bring new hire pay in line with United presumably to "fix their problem", the impression I get is that the ALPA's response would be words to the effect of "ok fine, if that's something you want, what are you willing to give us in return?" Effectively saying what's it worth to you to be able to pay some of us more! That's ludicrous! Anytime you can secure an incremental improvement for zero cost, you take it! That sets a new bar for future negotiations! They're not going to agree to an LOA where they have to give every pilot on the list another $20,000! And the reason that came in to play at Endeavor was not because we couldn't fill classes, it was because we were losing 60 FO's a month to other regionals and we were forced to downgrade captains to staff the right seat! Totally different problem!

Let me see if I understand you position. You want DALPA to allow the company to "fix the training pay" for 800-1000 or so non-voting new hire pilots during negotiations and weaken the bargaining position of of the remaining 12,000+ pilots.... Yet they are the selfish and short sighted ones??? Ok thanks. I am a new hire and I don't want anything to do with this. Also it will hurt us all as we come off 1st year pay and the company continues to drag its feet on meaningful contract and QOL improvements because you already helped fix one of their biggest needs for a short term pay bump.

If it's really a problem (like, the sky is falling, and UAL is sucking up all the talent, woe is me), than DAL will approach us, and not the other way around.

When they wanna fix it, they will open their wallets.

No LOAs or MOUs during section 6. Period.

^^^ That right there is the correct answer. ^^^

If new hires are choosing other airlines over Delta, that's a problem that Delta created, not DALPA. Only Delta can fix the problem, and they could fix it tomorrow with zero input from DALPA.

But why should the company fix it for free, if they can 'negotiate' a fix where 13000 pilots give up something for it?

Does it anger you more than the company lighting 6 Billion dollars on fire right in front of you for zero return because they don't have anywhere else they care to put it, while keeping all 13,000 pilots (including new hires) at significantly below peer set rates? Does it anger you that they potentially will be so hell bent on concessions for a small raise and a few COLAs that they will laugh in our faces taunting "a contract is a contract" while UAL is over 15% above us with similar profit sharing and no concessions to get it as they imply they will hide behind the RLA for years and years and not even give us parity to our biggest and lesser performing competitor?

No LOA's or side letters in section 6, especially for something they need. New hire pay (as well as their pay after their first year) will be fixed when we get a new PWA that will pass MEMRAT, and chock full of concessions doesn't meet that threshold.

I think your heart is in the right place. But I don't think you understand the intricacies of negotiations under Section 6. Side letters and MOAs at this point would truly be counterproductive. As someone keeps stating...it's chess, not checkers.

I have my own 'assessment' for new hires: When I fly with one, I buy dinner, beers, coffee, etc. I know it doesn't make up for the poor pay and accommodations during training, but I'm doing what I can.

Does anyone have a spreadsheet for new hire at DAL vs UAL. Off the top of my head.

UAL approx $7200 a month plus per diem, uniforms and a hotel

DAL is it like $3800 a month now, pay your own uniforms ($600ish?) hotel ($500 (crash pad)-$1500(cheap hotel))

Huge difference. I know it took me
a while to dig myself out of the new hire credit card hole after coming to DAL a few years ago.

Wonder why everyone wants to go to UAL, not to mention pay rates, wide bodies, first class tickets to training, extra pay if they have to go to LGA, extra pay for middle seats, choosing your crew meal day prior etc etc etc 😐