No. The discussion was about international trips at Delta. I therefore asked follow up questions about said trips. What are you confused about?

 

Nearly all international at the legacies is commutable. The 3 days 99.9% of the time leave in the afternoon/evening, 18-28 hours off, and get back the next day around lunch time, afternoon, early evening. There are also longer layover trips with the same arrival departure times if the destination isn't a daily flight. There are also some 2 day Europe trips that are not, AM dep, PM arrival the next day, credit 14-16+, for a 2 day trip, but don't worry those go senior since they are great for folks who live in base for obvious reasons. The Ultra long haul where I came from were generally double red eye, yes commutable, 4 day trips with 24-28 hour layovers, crediting 28-35 hours or so.

Generally the pax carriers deadhead less, but you already knew that, you turned down Delta, and are just HaPpY tO bE hErE. We get it, you love the toolbox and all things purple.

 

They are all 3-4 days with two legs which is why I replied.

DTW-HND, 3-day 26 hours
DTW-PVG, 3 or 4-day, 31 hours
LAX-SYD 4-day, 28 hours
etc.

Mostly, yes -- and all on the back end. Some of them do start around 9AM, such as DTW-HND, or ATL-HND, for a daytime flight over, and then end anywhere from 9AM to 7PM.

Others such as DTW-ICN and LAX-SYD start at 9PM on day one, and end at 7-8AM on day four -- very commutable.

Since most of the flights are daily, that's not as common as it likely is in the freight side. However, one can easily trade into trips that get broken up, and find a deadhead on one or sometimes both ends. i.e. DH ATL-BOS, fly BOS-TLV-BOS, DH to ATL the next day. Great for a commuter. Other trips are simply built similarly from the start, like DTW-HND-ATL- DH to DTW.

And yes, all international deadheads are in the highest class of service (no miles though, that'd be nice!).

That might be more of a freight thing with trips that more commonly have a deadhead on the end or beginning. Nobody really does that. Although if you found a trip that does start with a deadhead over, or end with a deadhead back (more rare except in the spring/fall when fleet types may change for the season), one could certainly deviate from the deadhead and skip it.

 

No, the surveys showed that the pilot group wanted focused negotiations and did not want to open many sections. One year ago, the surveys showed the same thing.

Oh look, it is one of those pilots who was saying how great it is here and how much money they made. Now, when they are facing the prospect of longer upgrades and possible displacement, they want to "fix" the contract that was so good before for the "good" of everyone else when in fact, they are only looking out for themselves.

 

Well, let me answer your question with the same type of response you would give a year ago. Have you asked your rep this? What did they say?

 

Something about the only constant being change? Have you tried reading this statement out loud in front of the mirror? So you can not only hear a clown, but also see him? Scope wasn’t an issue because we didn’t have threats of losing our jobs. Now it has become the number one priority in the next contract. SCOPE. SCOPE. SCOPE.

 

You failed to mention, “goal of reaching a Tentative Agreement by the end of May 2022.” The Negotiating Committee failed to meet this goal. In the meantime, industry standards have been redefined. I’m guessing you’re one of the crew force that’s a one issue voter. You’re becoming more outnumbered by the day. Systematic negligence of Scope by ALPA for decades is rearing its ugly head and people are waking up to the threat. QOL sections aren’t just falling behind by being ignored, they’re actually being conceded. This may have slipped by 18 months ago but it’s a different time.

 

Ha! Totally clueless. But thanks for the characterizations.

I made more last year than any of my previous years, sure. But I also got involuntarily extended more than I would have liked. RE: work rules.

Codifying scope language does in fact look out for the betterment of this entire pilot group. If you can’t see that, then you’re delusional. Or you’re on your way out, and dgaf.

This contract is riddled with holes. Why not improve them? People are faced with stagnation, loss of flying, closures of their base, retirement of their fleet. QOL and work rules are paramount.

A “fix” (whatever that means) to retirement means nothing. It’s a band-aide. A former block rep once told me “if we fix it, we’ll never have to negotiate retirement again.” What kind of garbage nonsense is that? Of course you will. You can sit there and pout all you want, but the fact is there are a lot of new people here with many many years to go. They value negotiation capital spent on work rules over anything else.

 

What about the survey taken last fall, you know, the one after May 2022 was in the rear view mirror and the Delta TA wasn't in existence. What did that survey show UnusualIneptitude? What work rule language has been conceded? Have you read the TA'd sections?

 

To my knowledge the results of that survey have not been released to the pilot group. I’m not an MEC insider like you, since you have seen the survey results you must be an ALPA associate with executive session access or access to information protected by an NDA.

For the record, changing my username in some attempt to hurt my feelings on a web board isn’t going to work and for your own sake I would mention that it’s an ineffective tool for advancing an argument. This is business to me. Nothing more, nothing less. If protecting Purple pilot jobs is somehow not something that interests you, so be it.

Concessions in Section 11 and 25 exist, they’ll be called a “choice” but it’s concession from current language. Confirmed by an ALPA rep.