Come on, ACL. You have a good idea of how pilot costs fit into the big picture here. I highly doubt that the difference between our current pay rates and something like, say, a 50% increase would have been the difference between growth in 07/08. In fact, do you remember what happened to fuel prices during that time period? That was way more significant to the company than a pilot pay increase would have been.

And there you go again wanting to tie our pay to profitability. I would say that's okay if we had not taken a 42% pay cut and we were just trying to negotiate a traditional increase. But we are digging out of a huge hole... and we're never going to make it with this mentality. Right is right and wrong is wrong. And it's wrong for the company to take advantage of us like they are. Like I said before, it's time for them to pay the piper. If they thought pilot costs were permanently reset to half value and they weren't planning on any kind of restoration, well that's just too bad. They were stupid. And our MEC was stupid for helping them think this. The more I read here, DPA just keeps looking better and better.

 

I hope you are right WRT scope across the entire pilot group. But that includes scope restoration. My 10% figure was a one year bump followed 12 months and 1 day later by another one for an approximately 20% bump in barely a year along with some significant immediate improvements, then right back at the negotiating table. If we adopt an all or nothing mentality, it will probably be several years before we get anything, including a COLA.

Then our NC will be in a position where they have to bring a huge increase just to make up for lost COLA during the negotation years, plus the restoration itself.

It all really comes back to scope. If we either continue to sell out the bottom of our own flying, or even if we just "hold the line" to its current rediculous level of outsourcing a massive armada of large RJ's with first class, whatever restoration we negotiate will be in grave peril the microsecond the next downturn hits. If we drag out negotiations for 5 years waiting for a walk off grand slam or nothing, odds are overwhelming that we will see a downturn again by then.

I want 50-60+% as well on the pay raise side. But it is only one side of the equation. If we don't strengthen the other side of that equation (scope) it simply will never add up beyond the transitional period of date of signing until date of downturn.

If 50-60% is the goal, we have several ways we can achieve that. All on day one with a grand slam TA, or over a couple short TA's of successive 20% (or more) bumps which will add up/compound to 50-60% pretty quick and is not only much more likely to happen, but happen quicker and with needed restoration in other areas.

Again if you are right about scope being such a priority, great. But YTF is no one on our side publicly talking about it? At all? Even in theory? Even in raw concept? Soon our smallest plane will be in the 150 seat range, somewhere around half our block hours/pilot jobs will be outsourced mostly to large RJ's, and the regional sector is already placing orders for 100 seaters and beyond. I think getting something inked, right now, to put a stop to that is the highest priority. If we drag our feet looking for a massive Dubinsky 2000 summer of love "United plus" every last golden egg contract that puts enormous pressure on the company, the NC and ALPA national to get us a pay raise by any means necessary. Even if that means itself weakens the foundation the raise is built on in the first place.

That's why when I say 10% on day one, I assume that comes with significant scope reversal because that is the section I will look at first. I will not be blinded by some 50-60% raise or niche featherbedding work rule to look past scope. If we can get both then great. But scope trumps pay because without scope you won't be able to keep the pay, although selling scope might get you the pay in the first place for the near term and history tells us that most recent pre BK contracts when things were at their peak still came with scope sales.

 

Heyas ACL,

Using the "standard" inflation data is not good because it usually excludes food and energy, which has skyrocketed these last few years. You need to use the "all inclusive" number.

Nu

 

Is it as big as your dream to be management some day? Keep shilling.

Carl

 

This is such an important point. The company is doing a strong job on focusing on its bottom line. We have unions to provide the balance necessary to ensure the pilots' bottom lines are focused upon. Instead, we have a union that wants to help management do management's job!

We lost the balance of power, thus the losses in our paychecks.

Carl

 

How many times do I have to say this. I am not trying to tie anything to our profitability. I told you what level of willingness to expect.

I cannot speak for the management team here at DAL, but if the entire playing field is close to equal our costs are fixed. Get UCAL and AMR to produce results that can give us 2 billion in contractual gains.

The goal as I see it is to do what I posted last night. Get the big guys really close in pay etc, and then have short duration contracts to pattern them up.

A restoration contract would put pilot costs at about 10% if the total revenue of the company. We cannot begin to take a stance on what to demand. We need to see what transpires in the next 12 months.

 

Plenty of turnarounds to the western cities could be done from ATL, DTW and other bases. No surprise you would only focus on JFK. And I dont know if you're a hick or not.

Regarding the rest of your post, it's just more drivel to get people to believe that fatigue is made better by adding 1 to 2 more flight hours per day to a 2 man crew. It's a great example of what I've been talking about. When some shill comes here and puts out some long winded explanation to excuse something that makes no logical sense...it's BS!

Carl

 

Go back and reread your own posts. It sure seems clear to me that you're tying our pay increases to profitability. I don't have time right now to go back and retrieve all the quotes, but it should be obvious as you have said it several times.

I'm not a big fan of "pattern bargaining" in this situation. I understand that it will make it easier for us if the other pilots get big increases prior to our negotiation. That's common sense. But I really don't see that as being relevant to the fact that we are still being paid emergency/bankruptcy wages long after the emergency/bankruptcy has been over. I want to see the company do the right thing... put their money where their mouth is and start treating us like a valuable asset instead of an adversary. I also want to see whoever is representing us (whether that's ALPA or DPA) make it clear in no uncertain terms that our present situation is unacceptable, that we do not appreciate being taken advantage of like that, and that the expectation of this pilot group is to make significant progress towards restoration with our next contract in 2012. So far, ALPA doesn't seem to want to touch that with a 10 foot pole. I think that's the wrong move (has been all along) and has already made restoration more difficult.

In any case, pinning our hopes to whatever somebody else can achieve is not the kind of proactive representation I expect for my dues dollars.

 

DAL88, I know what you want. I also think it is too early to know what we are going to ask for.

If it sounded like I am stating our pay should only be raised if we are profitable, it was not my intention. I do beleive that the company needs to be doing well for us to have sustainability to any restoration we get. Does not mean profitable? No, but it is preferable.

I want our compensation level back too, but I am not willing to trade one iota of what we currently have for it.

As for what ALPA is doing, well it is my opinion that they are not managing anything. They have a process and will go though that process like they always have. If the majority of us want restoration and have the resolve for it, I have no doubt that it will be what they put forth. It is just not the time to put that proposal out for the world to see. Heck it is not even being worked on yet.

I also caution you to sign on to a new association based on a promise of restoration. What will your response be if they fall short?

 

You know, it's kinda like when I was a DC-9 instructor at my previous airline. If I had a student that was struggling, the difference between someone who was giving it their best effort (obviously trying their best to achieve the objective of proficiency) and someone who didn't seem to really care (apparently not giving it their best effort)... well that would make a world of difference in how much extra training that individual would get and to what degree we would work with that individual to get him or her through.

ALPA has not in my opinion been giving restoration their best effort. Heck, they won't even acknowledge it as an objective or talk about it at all! I can tell when someone is trying to achieve something or not because a normal person or organization has identified it as their objective and is constantly talking about it and focused on it. I don't see any of evidence of ALPA working towards restoration. Nada, zilch, zip. On the other hand, if DPA comes in and is obviously working towards this objective... doing everything they can to achieve it...well I can go a lot further with that, just like the struggling student. I don't expect anyone to be perfect or achieve perfect results. But I do expect them to have appropriate objectives and give it their best effort.