Vote of No Confidence
 

According to Mantooth, Bond, Sailing, Curly and the rest a vote of no confidence or requesting the CEO steps down will result in nothing.

Tell that to the SWA pilots.

Add 11% to their hourly rates for apples to apples due to their TFP. 54 minutes is an hour at SWA.

They have trips touching vacation making it more than double ours.

Their trips average over 6 hours per day vs our 5:15.

Our patience has run out. Either Captain Malone steps up and leads like we know he can or he needs to step down. No more invisible man. No more being led down management's path.

What concessions did the SWA pilots make?

None.

PBS. -- Nyet

Scope -- No

What is wrong with us?

Who asked for a self funding VEBA? No one.

SWA AIP does include code sharing. Which to date is not allowed at SWA according to this article:
http://www.dallasnews.com/business/airline-industry/20160829-as-labor-tensions-simmer-southwest-airlines-and-its-pilots-take-big-step-toward-new-deal.ece

A 15% raise to their current hourly rate (based on APC numbers) is below our rate adjusted for the company's last offer of 16.5%....

They've had codesharing in the past. For example, the ATA codeshare for all the Hawaii routes.

Jerry,

Apples to Oranges comparison of contracts compared to ours. (Honest question.) Why do you post this stuff and further degrade your credibility?

The SWA contract (work rules) applied to our manning formula would be a HUUUUGE manning concession on our part. The Company would laugh us out of the negotiating room, and sign a SWA-like manning concession tomorrow.

For crying out loud, at least post something worth standing behind.:rolleyes:

From rumors I heard, even Richard didn't want sleepy Ed taking over.....

They have had code sharing in the past, sand I do believe they have a deal with Volaris, but it is rarely exercised.

And they got chomped, using SWA equipment you would have to swim the last three hundred miles.:eek:

Add 11% to convert from their TFP. Their hour is :54 minutes.

They have trips touching vacation. More than double ours.

They have no PBS and trips touching vacation. :54 minute tfp. Their contract would add 2000 captains at Delta.

Back away from the koolaid.

I both agree and disagree.

For starters SWA does have a lot of great elements to their contract, at least some of which we should emulate.

It is very difficult to compare the two, as they fly one fleet type and we are almost the universal opposite. Kind of hard to compare the two, but both companies seem to prosper with their respective models.

But as for SWA rules "adding 2000 captains"...I think nyet. Do you just make this stuff up, throw it against some metaphorical wall and hope that some sticks?

SWA pilots have long been the industry's most productive. They are always flying more, have few if any restrictions on picking up time and in general can fly more block hours with fewer pilots than other airlines' pilots could or would, EVEN IF those other airlines had an identical fleet and identical route structure.

2000 captains? If we adopted SWA's work rules, we would love some, and the company would love others. My guess is that we would need far fewer, not more, captains.

Don't forget WN has "lance captains," all short call, and various other oddities.

Cherry picking never really gets you anywhere productive if you hold that cherry picking as a "if not, then no."

Set goals and shore up areas where we are short (VACATION.... MEDICAL!!!), but the entire product is what's up.

While Jerry's "2000 added" number is clearly an exaggerated/no factual basis number, it seems highly unlikely that we would ever lose positions under our fleet plan with LUV work rules and your own analysis above seems to establish that.

There is no question in my mind that LUV pilots are more efficient than we are...when they come to work. That is the benefit of having one category. I would posit that many narrow-body Delta pilots would like to see productive trips like LUVs as well thereby minimizing the number of days they have to work.

As for picking up time, our high ALVs plus 15 hours puts us in the same neighborhood and then throw on a G/S or two and we are probably ahead of them. But, in the end, they are restricted by the same domestic FARs that we are.

However, remember that LUV still uses line of time bidding. Therefore trips that touch vacation and training drop into open time - they do not bid a schedule around pre-posted events that credit only 62% of a day of work....they get 100% of the value of the line plus the time off. Remember when we used to do that?

Also, LUV still does a day of ground training for CQ which adds another day to the CQ footprint and thereby makes it easier to drop a touching trip for CQ when you have a 4 day footprint.

Finally, by way of another comparison, LUV does not fly red eyes which limits pot of available domestic flights.

They do seem to like the AM/PM concept for trip construction which makes commuting an issue - either you commute in the day before an AM but finish early or finish a trip late and have to commute out the next AM. Good for circadian rhythym stuff but not good for commuting. 😆 Really no idea if that is a plus or minus regarding manning though.

We will never be a single category carrier like LUV but until they implement PBS and all of its efficiencies, you are going to have a hard time convincing me that we would lose manning by accepting their work rules.

The bigger (and much more important) question is how the LUV AIP factors into our NMB "time out." We aren't LUV, we aren't UPS and we aren't Allegiant but the trend has been established. Do we now have a "LUV dot" that needs to be addressed when the parties resume Section 3 negotiations?

I'm not sure what equipment Jerry flies, but I can assure you that us domestic 88 dogs DO NOT want to work any harder or spend ANY more time in the cockpit of these NB's!

As far as SWA, I'd rather NOT fly the 737 POS for my entire career, even if I earned more!

YMMV

Well at the risk of actually sort of agreeing with Jerry (shocking I know), I THINK that his point was that if we adopted the SWA work rules, for trip construction if nothing else, you would get more pay and credit for the exact same flying that you do now.

But it is a difficult comparison for sure. It looks like the SWA AIP (not even a formal TA yet) is a good one, but I only say that as a NON-SWA sort.

wait, an 88 pilot views the 73 as a pos?

Really Jerry?

If we adopted LUV's work rules, we would also suddenly have a surplus of several hundred pilots.

Anybody wanna be a Lance Captain? I can just see that...

Is that LUV work rules with or without PBS?

On average, a SW 737 pilot works fewer days a month than a DAL 737 pilot. And now if we go to their work rules it would give up DAL jobs? How the heck does that math work out?

Lance Captain is an awesome deal. Keep your FO schedule, vacations, bidding power, etc, but also get to hand pick 9 days a month that you get paid as a Captain.

Some of our highest paid pilots at Southwest are Lance Captains. Unfortunately it's such a good deal that some guys never leave. A lot of times you can hold Captain in a base while not senior enough to hold Lance. That is why this contract is putting a 12 month limit on Lancing. A lot of people aren't happy by that, but it really is most fair to everyone.

Well, that shoots down that 'better than dal TA2015' nonsense. ;)

Congrats on your efforts. Tough to spend that much time in negotiations, hope you guys are satisfied with the overall result.

I think it is far better to pursue a strategy that maximizes benefits for all members, rather than sweet deals for a privileged few. I also think that management should have its feet held to the fire, and to actually man the fleet. I am glad we don't have lance captains at Delta.

And a special THANK YOU to whoever deleted my post.

I deleted your post. Commercial endorsements are not allowed on APC -see TOU on the rules and regulations thread. If you want to send me a PM explaining what it was supposed to mean and how it in any way contributed to the conversation we will review it.


Or you can post sarcastic comments such as above, but I think you will have more success with the first approach.

Scoop

err, don't all pilots think that? No (mad) dog in the fight because I try to avoid both; but as a former DC-9 pilot and a lightly experienced 737 classic pilot, I'd say the 88 has a minor comfort advantage and is whisper-quiet in comparison. From what I've heard the Douglas FMS will offer you many more "doubleyou tee F" moments than the Boeing box is capable of producing. If only there were a narrowbody that is quiet, comfortable and not out to eat your certificate on every leg!

DAL used to have dual quals, sometimes triple quals, lotsa books, maybe fly three types in one month.

Apart from the trips and the pay(major items I know) I'd much rather FLY the Maddog than the 73. Much quieter, better FMS and lands about 20 kts. less than the 73. And it stops just fine, as long as the ground spoilers deploy and stay deployed:eek:

Thank you for your support!

No 7 hr. legs JFK to SEA
No Quito (I actually liked Quito)
No all-nighters (except in the summer T-storm daily delay program!!)

But, having said that, I can't wait to exit the 88 world of reroute, multi legs into ATL in the summer, and like somebody else said, an A/C system that feels like a cat breathing on you!

There's a third approach. I think I will respond with the sort of images you have ignored in the past.

http://i3.walesonline.co.uk/incoming...-149345872.jpg

This hypocrisy is unbecoming, unless Nivea owns a chunk of APC. For some reason this guy is all over the "Latest and greatest about Delta" thread.

I really have no clue as to what you are talking about. You posted a picture of an emblem for Park Tools with zero verbiage. I have no idea what you where trying to imply - you didn't reference what post it was in response to.

I could guess - THe guys trying to park us are tools - OK what guys? is your goal to turn this into another Chit Chat. I delete/edit plenty of posts without regard to ideology and routinely catch heat from guys on all sides but your ideology is obviously blinding you and you can not see it.

Did you receive a infraction? Have you been banned? I simply requested you to explain your post in a Pm - That apparently is too much to ask.

As a matter of fact of all the guys who have posts deleted yours has been by far the most sophomoric and petulant response. Congratulations!

How many of those images have you reported via the red triangle on the left side of each post? Seriously, how many of your reported posts have you not received a response about? I think I know the answer.

Your credibility is not on the rise.

Scoop