TheManager

Tex,

I want to drill down into this more. From what I understand, an engineer per se is paid the same rate whether he/she works for Santa Fe or what ever other line.

How do we accomplish this as pilots. A guild? A salary floor? What kind of role can ALPA National play? And, how about that retirement?

80ktsClamp

I'm not so sure about the same pay rate across the board... the starting salaries for the same positions certainly vary per their websites. I heard similar and researched this a while back and wasn't able to come up with anything conclusive.

ATCsaidDoWhat

Right back at ya! Don't think you'll find any stuffing for the eel's, but you can always chase them with a nice bowl of steaming pidgeon heads, a side of chicken feet and a Tsing Tao...

newKnow

Really?

Let me do some figuring...... (MATH ALERT!)

Let's see... Southwest last year posted profits - again. It was their 37 year of profits in a row. I'm going to be generous and say that they have had "above industry average wages" for the past 12 years. Although, if my memory serves me correctly, in 1998 their pay was still way below what everyone else was paying. But, for the sake of simple math, it took SWA 25 years to get to the point where they paid their pilots above industry average wages. Or, if you want to compare apples to apples and match words to words, it took 25 years of profitability for SWA's turnip to have enough blood in it to get their pilots pay to above average.


Geeze. With your logic and my generous math, when Delta has 24 1/2 more years of profitability, if they follow the SWA model - which is the only perennially profitable passenger carrier I can think of, only then should I expect above industry average wages. Great.

If I were management, I would view a thought process like this one, coming from a pilot from my airline, to be the real pot of gold. I hope it doesn't spread.

newKnow

alfa,

Thanks for the response. Basically, what you are saying is that at this point, we don't know what we should really expect from the company because the negotiating environment that we will find ourselves in, in a year or so, is uncertain.

So, my point is, why are people coming up with reasons why we won't get what we want before we even ask? Why are people trying to protect the company against future losses, and thus future givebacks on our part, in a market that cannot be predicted?

The whole "I don't want to ask for too much, even though the company is making record profits, because the company might lose money later on and make us give it back" plan is pretty lame to me. Mainly because, as you state, no one can predict the market. So, it is just as likely that Delta will be profitable over the life of the contract as it is likely that they will lose money every year. There are unseen factors abound, good and bad. Hell, what if, starting now, Delta has 37 years of profitability like Southwest has had? With the above mindset, we would be less and less likely to ever ask for our fair pay because in our mind it would be more likely that the next contract period would be the one where Delta lost money. It would be only after the old contract expired that we would know that we should have asked for more money.

Another thing (I believe you were asking me about this.), I feel this whole APA, AMR, pattern bargaining, and ALPA waiting for the leap-frog effect thing, needs to be looked at differently. I know we are not operating in a vacuum and I know the company is very much aware of what is going on over there. I'm sure they don't want our costs to outpace AMR pilots pay so much that they would be operating at a disadvantage. But, come on, let's (ALPA and DAL) think outside the box. I ride on the crew bus with AMR pilots all the time. They are ****ed of in a serious way. If DAL gave us what American pilots are seeking without a fight, AMR would have to give into their pilots demands. If they didn't, it's quite possible they wouldn't be able to operate an airline-- their pilots would probably wreck unbelievable havoc. If the shoe were on the other foot, what would you do?

Waiting for pattern bargaining and leap-frogging should not be an option when dealing with American Airlines. Our case to our union should be that we don't need American pilots to lead us to higher pay-rates. Our case to the company should be that AMR will have to follow what DAL pays. It's easy to see that American pilots are not in the under-cutting mood. So, you (Delta) should pay us now while you can reap some benefits. And if you or I or any other pilots have any doubts, our case to ourselves should be that we owe it to ourselves to keep our expectations high. Among other things, look at how smoothly this merger has gone, we deserve it.

New K

80ktsClamp

LM himself said a couple meetings ago that "pattern bargaining" is dead. Are our unionoids and friends trying to say otherwise?

slowplay

If you're referring to C44, I was there, and that's not what I heard him say. What I heard is that the Section 6 process is a broken system. Relying on pattern bargaining in that process will not been in our best interest.

Bucking Bar

I think he was referring to the fact the union has all the leverage of a spaghetti noodle after having been boiled for a week. Since under the RLA we can't really withdraw our services and management has substantially replaced our services, the point is well taken that we've got to be ready to "negotiate" when scraps fall from the table.

Look at examples like Swissair and what's going on a Lufthansa. If they struck, management would giggle and say "Fragen, die nicht!"Knew N,

With nonsensical scope limits, we do have real exposures to market forces. Does anyone doubt that the Company (and our Union) would seek to maximize revenue if a serious threat existed to the Company's survival? Both sides would be telling us how smart it would be to utilized outsourced flying to its maximum certified capacity. (That's the OBJECTIVE limit) In a serious downturn does anyone seriously think $40 million dollar regional jets under long term contracts are going to get parked, when management already touts the flexibility provided them by operating a fully depreciated mainline narrowbody fleet that costs little more than fuel for the trip to Victorville?

(... and before the apologists start talking about 50 seaters, no, I'm talking E175's that could even replace our Latin America work)

ALPA will never come right out and say we now have to compete with the alter ego airlines they assisted in creating, but that's the truth of the matter.

Carl Spackler

The really twisted part about all this newK, is that OUR UNION SHOULD BE MAKING THIS CASE TO US! Why the hell should we be trying to convince our own union, and then convince management? Why does it feel like we have two adversaries instead of just one?

Not P***ed at you, just venting about the fact that your post illustrates what a non-union feeling it is to be part of ALPA.

Carl

Bucking Bar

Carl,

ALPA's being honest about where we are at.