View Poll Results: How do you (reallyfeel about the current PWA?
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 98. You may not vote on this poll
DAL/NWA 3: The PWA REQUIRED in 2012
02-02-2010, 08:42 PM
#91
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Posts: 799
the furlough recalls got their longevity reinstored but EVERYONE on the NWA side gets our pay bumps 2 months after we started with NWA NOT at DOH. The northwest way was to start the longevity clock once the first person in your class finished OE 
.
In the Joint Contract the NWA side was specifically written out of matching the NWA way of longevity which is at DOH.
SO anyone who still gets pay bumps, meaning they've been here less than 12 years, still gets it 2 months past DOH which is different than the DELTA way. Also anyone whom gets hired from this point forward will get their longevity bump at DOH even though those of us already here will still be under a sup par contract.
ALSO ALL NWA pilots are on a sub par retiremet contribution. We get bumps in company contributions until 2012 at which point we'll CATCH UP to you guys at DAL at 12%.
Clear as mud
. In the Joint Contract the NWA side was specifically written out of matching the NWA way of longevity which is at DOH.
SO anyone who still gets pay bumps, meaning they've been here less than 12 years, still gets it 2 months past DOH which is different than the DELTA way. Also anyone whom gets hired from this point forward will get their longevity bump at DOH even though those of us already here will still be under a sup par contract.
ALSO ALL NWA pilots are on a sub par retiremet contribution. We get bumps in company contributions until 2012 at which point we'll CATCH UP to you guys at DAL at 12%.
Clear as mud
Just to trying to get the facts on this, thanks
FB
02-02-2010, 09:02 PM
#92
Underboob King
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Guppy Commander
Posts: 4,412
As far as retirement goes, that effects ALL pilots not just the 170. All the DAL-N guys are getting a significantly less amount contributed each month until 2012. Maybe when we hire and guys realize that the newhires are getting more than them they'll get the fire started under there butts.
We were specifically written out of being included in getting our longevity pay hump at of DOH like what's written in the contract thus the heartburn.
We've filed and passed resolutions in regards to this and each time we did the MEC shot it down
02-03-2010, 03:31 AM
#93
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,386
[quote=Superpilot92;756835]170ish is the total number of pilots hired post 9/11. The other pilots that haven't hit the 12 year mark got their longevity back so therefore the 2 month difference isn't as big of a deal for them. Thus leaving the 170 of us fighting to get this changed so we're all on the same pay schedule.
As far as retirement goes, that effects ALL pilots not just the 170. All the DAL-N guys are getting a significantly less amount contributed each month until 2012. Maybe when we hire and guys realize that the newhires are getting more than them they'll get the fire started under there butts.
We were specifically written out of being included in getting our longevity pay hump at of DOH like what's written in the contract thus the heartburn.
We've filed and passed resolutions in regards to this and each time we did the MEC shot it down[/quote
The DC plan contribution changes are because of the huge obligation the company assumed in taking over the NWA DB plan. The projected yearly funding requirements for the next few years far exceed the difference in the DC funding. I know if your a new hire you have little or nothing in the NWA DB plan but that was the rational. Overall the NWA pilot group is going to receive a lot more retirement funding then the Delta group the next few years. Rumor is the pilot plan alone will require 200 million this year.
As far as retirement goes, that effects ALL pilots not just the 170. All the DAL-N guys are getting a significantly less amount contributed each month until 2012. Maybe when we hire and guys realize that the newhires are getting more than them they'll get the fire started under there butts.
We were specifically written out of being included in getting our longevity pay hump at of DOH like what's written in the contract thus the heartburn.
We've filed and passed resolutions in regards to this and each time we did the MEC shot it down
[/quoteThe DC plan contribution changes are because of the huge obligation the company assumed in taking over the NWA DB plan. The projected yearly funding requirements for the next few years far exceed the difference in the DC funding. I know if your a new hire you have little or nothing in the NWA DB plan but that was the rational. Overall the NWA pilot group is going to receive a lot more retirement funding then the Delta group the next few years. Rumor is the pilot plan alone will require 200 million this year.
02-03-2010, 04:31 AM
#94
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
[quote=sailingfun;756899]
--------------
I think this discussion above highlights one of the most significant (potential) whipsaw tools available to management - retirement funding. I caution everyone to be aware that there is a difference between the two groups in this regard and try to see what happened, but resolve in your own mind to be a bigger person despite the differences. This is an area I see as a potential barrier to unity going forward and WE must consciously guard ourselves from being drawn into the destructive fray it can cause.
Scambo
170ish is the total number of pilots hired post 9/11. The other pilots that haven't hit the 12 year mark got their longevity back so therefore the 2 month difference isn't as big of a deal for them. Thus leaving the 170 of us fighting to get this changed so we're all on the same pay schedule.
As far as retirement goes, that effects ALL pilots not just the 170. All the DAL-N guys are getting a significantly less amount contributed each month until 2012. Maybe when we hire and guys realize that the newhires are getting more than them they'll get the fire started under there butts.
We were specifically written out of being included in getting our longevity pay hump at of DOH like what's written in the contract thus the heartburn.
We've filed and passed resolutions in regards to this and each time we did the MEC shot it down[/quote
The DC plan contribution changes are because of the huge obligation the company assumed in taking over the NWA DB plan. The projected yearly funding requirements for the next few years far exceed the difference in the DC funding. I know if your a new hire you have little or nothing in the NWA DB plan but that was the rational. Overall the NWA pilot group is going to receive a lot more retirement funding then the Delta group the next few years. Rumor is the pilot plan alone will require 200 million this year.
As far as retirement goes, that effects ALL pilots not just the 170. All the DAL-N guys are getting a significantly less amount contributed each month until 2012. Maybe when we hire and guys realize that the newhires are getting more than them they'll get the fire started under there butts.
We were specifically written out of being included in getting our longevity pay hump at of DOH like what's written in the contract thus the heartburn.
We've filed and passed resolutions in regards to this and each time we did the MEC shot it down
[/quoteThe DC plan contribution changes are because of the huge obligation the company assumed in taking over the NWA DB plan. The projected yearly funding requirements for the next few years far exceed the difference in the DC funding. I know if your a new hire you have little or nothing in the NWA DB plan but that was the rational. Overall the NWA pilot group is going to receive a lot more retirement funding then the Delta group the next few years. Rumor is the pilot plan alone will require 200 million this year.
I think this discussion above highlights one of the most significant (potential) whipsaw tools available to management - retirement funding. I caution everyone to be aware that there is a difference between the two groups in this regard and try to see what happened, but resolve in your own mind to be a bigger person despite the differences. This is an area I see as a potential barrier to unity going forward and WE must consciously guard ourselves from being drawn into the destructive fray it can cause.
Scambo
02-03-2010, 05:22 AM
#95
Works Every Weekend
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 737 ATL
Posts: 3,506
I think this discussion above highlights one of the most significant (potential) whipsaw tools available to management - retirement funding. I caution everyone to be aware that there is a difference between the two groups in this regard and try to see what happened, but resolve in your own mind to be a bigger person despite the differences. This is an area I see as a potential barrier to unity going forward and WE must consciously guard ourselves from being drawn into the destructive fray it can cause.
Scambo
Scambo
Similarly situated pilots at the two airlines are going to have vastly different retirements due to NWA retaining the defined benefit.
It might become a goal in 2012 to reduce that disparity via increased DC funding for those who took the biggest loss and who are in a certain age bracket.
In other words - bring back the matrix.
02-03-2010, 05:38 AM
#96
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Top
Posts: 472
I'd like to chime in regarding the whole negotiations process.
I'll lead by saying that I unabashedly love Delta Air Lines. Any company that will pay me to do something I'd gladly pay to do is aces in my book.
Having said that, however, friends are friends and business is business. Contract negotiations are business.
When I led a negotiating team during a grad school exercise ( - I know), we prepared thusly:
1. Listed our wants and needs.
2. Assigned numerical values to these wants and needs.
3. Had a base number lower than which continued negotiations weren't productive. This was our "walk away" number.
The other side came to the table with a similar matrix. We cut a deal that let us shake hands over a deal that came out above both of our base numbers, but was nowhere near the high end of either of our totals.
This forum is a great place to spitball our wants and needs, but serious talks about their hierarchy (or their numerical value), must happen behind the semi-closed doors of the ALPA website. Now, we know that our beloved DAL is in court fighting against plausible charges of e-mail hacking against one of its critics, so I think it's unreasonable to expect that the ALPA website is anything like a locked room. But by moving a nitty-gritty conversation into an ALPA virtual conference room, we at least expose DAL to serious repercussions if we catch it listening in.
Having said all that, I'm for pay scale restoration and a solid scope clause that restricts all flying over 70 seats to DAL mainline (But I'd make 50 part of my opening bid).
But, hey, wouldn't that cost the airline a whole lot of money? Wouldn't the American public hate us? Wouldn't the sky fall? First, DAL was willing to drop$1.1B on JAL. DAL just announced that it's going to drop $1B so rich people can lie flight on the punishingly long trip to London. DAL can afford to drop a couple of hundred million on us pilots. Second, we aren't negotiating with the American public. We're negotiating with the management of DAL. Third, the sky won't fall - we'll hold it up with our egos.
Thanks for reading, and fly safely.
I'll lead by saying that I unabashedly love Delta Air Lines. Any company that will pay me to do something I'd gladly pay to do is aces in my book.
Having said that, however, friends are friends and business is business. Contract negotiations are business.
When I led a negotiating team during a grad school exercise (
- I know), we prepared thusly: 1. Listed our wants and needs.
2. Assigned numerical values to these wants and needs.
3. Had a base number lower than which continued negotiations weren't productive. This was our "walk away" number.
The other side came to the table with a similar matrix. We cut a deal that let us shake hands over a deal that came out above both of our base numbers, but was nowhere near the high end of either of our totals.
This forum is a great place to spitball our wants and needs, but serious talks about their hierarchy (or their numerical value), must happen behind the semi-closed doors of the ALPA website. Now, we know that our beloved DAL is in court fighting against plausible charges of e-mail hacking against one of its critics, so I think it's unreasonable to expect that the ALPA website is anything like a locked room. But by moving a nitty-gritty conversation into an ALPA virtual conference room, we at least expose DAL to serious repercussions if we catch it listening in.
Having said all that, I'm for pay scale restoration and a solid scope clause that restricts all flying over 70 seats to DAL mainline (But I'd make 50 part of my opening bid).
But, hey, wouldn't that cost the airline a whole lot of money? Wouldn't the American public hate us? Wouldn't the sky fall? First, DAL was willing to drop$1.1B on JAL. DAL just announced that it's going to drop $1B so rich people can lie flight on the punishingly long trip to London. DAL can afford to drop a couple of hundred million on us pilots. Second, we aren't negotiating with the American public. We're negotiating with the management of DAL. Third, the sky won't fall - we'll hold it up with our egos.
Thanks for reading, and fly safely.
02-03-2010, 06:01 AM
#97
Works Every Weekend
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 737 ATL
Posts: 3,506
Now, we know that our beloved DAL is in court fighting against plausible charges of e-mail hacking against one of its critics, so I think it's unreasonable to expect that the ALPA website is anything like a locked room. But by moving a nitty-gritty conversation into an ALPA virtual conference room, we at least expose DAL to serious repercussions if we catch it listening in.
Good post, but just one point.
Despite requiring a password, the DALPA forum is widely read by management and the press. Has been for years. There's no "hacking" involved. 4th floor management has many DALPA members with access and the press just has a few "friends". There's never been any repercussions. Its just a fact of life.
02-03-2010, 06:03 AM
#98
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,386
But, hey, wouldn't that cost the airline a whole lot of money? Wouldn't the American public hate us? Wouldn't the sky fall? First, DAL was willing to drop$1.1B on JAL. DAL just announced that it's going to drop $1B so rich people can lie flight on the punishingly long trip to London. DAL can afford to drop a couple of hundred million on us pilots. Second, we aren't negotiating with the American public. We're negotiating with the management of DAL. Third, the sky won't fall - we'll hold it up with our egos.
Thanks for reading, and fly safely.
Thanks for reading, and fly safely.
In the case of adding lie flat seats there was a lot more included in the 1.1 billion besides seats. The plan was spread over several years and was around 300 million per year however the key thing to note is the company stated it would not increase their normal cash outlay for refurbishment of equipment and other costs to operate. In other words all the cash was coming out of the existing budgets for refurbishment and replacement of hard goods. They only made the announcement to make it sound like we were doing something special for the customer.
As far as DAL dropping a couple of hundred million on the pilots the current pilot costs are around 2.1 billion a year for the combined group. To restore wages to the 2004 levels plus cost of living requires at least doubling the current pay rates. In addition if we went back to the old work rules the company would have to hire 3 to 4000 thousand more pilots. Even basic quick math shows we are talking billions per year every year. The items you quoted are pennies compared to what is at stake in the contract. I want a lot on the contract. A couple of hundred million is not going to be nearly enough for me to vote for a new contract however I can't forsee DALPA under the RLA every being able to extract billions per year from the company in one contract.
02-03-2010, 06:41 AM
#99
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
I think this discussion above highlights one of the most significant (potential) whipsaw tools available to management - retirement funding. I caution everyone to be aware that there is a difference between the two groups in this regard and try to see what happened, but resolve in your own mind to be a bigger person despite the differences. This is an area I see as a potential barrier to unity going forward and WE must consciously guard ourselves from being drawn into the destructive fray it can cause.
Nothing works quite as well as worrying about what your fellow pilot gets, in terms of making sure none of us get anything good. Which is why the only solution is to suck it up, accept the fact the NW guys have a frozen DB plan, just like there are still "Western-only" and (I think) "Pan-Am only" provisions in our contract.
Otherwise, then you have to do a lot of slicing-and-dicing, to try to make it "fair". Check Essential made a good point about what deadzoners will want:
It needn't be destructive, but believe me, there are quite a few Delta dead zone guys who are acutely aware of this retirement discrepancy. The NWA pilots are extracting nearly a billion dollars (maybe more) over the life of this JCBA that is not available to any Delta pilots.
Similarly situated pilots at the two airlines are going to have vastly different retirements due to NWA retaining the defined benefit.
It might become a goal in 2012 to reduce that disparity via increased DC funding for those who took the biggest loss and who are in a certain age bracket. In other words - bring back the matrix.
Similarly situated pilots at the two airlines are going to have vastly different retirements due to NWA retaining the defined benefit.
It might become a goal in 2012 to reduce that disparity via increased DC funding for those who took the biggest loss and who are in a certain age bracket. In other words - bring back the matrix.
When you ask for the matrix, you're not just trying to address a disparity you perceive between N/S, but between you and me, and every subgroup. You're creating a landscape for division.
What happened to you sucks. No doubt about it. But it happened already. And the union tried to compensate with the Note money. The attempt at clean-up has been made. Now, we have two choices: suck it up, and accept our fate, or make more attempts, each uglier than the other, and each, as Scambo said, with a clear potential to cost us, and cost us dearly.
My focus is on our future, not the past. Everyone has a significant issue in their past. Mine has to do with losing 100% of my income for three years, and everyone else negotiating away botht the NFC, and the recall schedule. But I've taken my lumps, and accepted them as a part of my past. Luckily, the "redeeming" aspect of losing your retirement is that it was done because of a run on the bank. The pilots that took their lump sum are no longer in your way.The exodus allowed you to move up, and me to be recalled. Never have we had such young ER captains. When you factor in that adavancement, and the Note, and the DC contributions, with potentially better payrates, better workrules for ALL, then we ALL have a shot at a better future.
02-03-2010, 06:46 AM
#100
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
The value of this forum is that maybe, just maybe, it throws in a couple of original ideas into the mix, and that it allows people to have some points to consider before they get polled or contact their reps. It also has the potential to let people see what big picture items have the potential to unite us, and divide us.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
