We squeaked in above 2.5 billion at around 2.7 billion. Let's do the math:

15% (pre C2012) of 2.5 billion is 375,000,000 vs. 10% (C2012) of 2.5 billion is 250,000,000.

20% (the amount above 2.5 billion) of 200,000,000 is 40,000,000.

415,000,000 (pre C2012 concessionary value) is more than 290,000,000 (C2012 value), right?

That works out to be about a 6000 dollar reduction for me.

That is a 30.2% reduction in profit sharing money that we could have had. We gave up something we didn't need to give up in C2012. Trying to spin it any other way helps the DPA.

edit: I can't remember if pre 2012 it was 15% for all values. Just to cover my bases, that would have been 405 million vice 290 million, yielding a 28.4% reduction in payout in C2012.

 

How's that?

 

DAL 88 Driver,

This is from the Federal Register. You have seen it before, which makes me wonder why you persist with your flawed reasoning:

A sleep opportunity generally commences once a flightcrew member is at a location where the flightcrew member can reasonably be expected to go to sleep and not have that sleep interrupted. The sleep opportunity does not need to take place at the flightcrew member’s home, but it must take place at a location where the flightcrew member can reasonably expect to obtain 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep. In addition, as the FAA pointed out in the preamble to final rule, specific sleep situations ‘‘are difficult to capture in a regulatory standard.’’ That is why § 117.25(f) requires the flightcrew member to notify the certificate holder if the flightcrew member determines that he or she cannot get the requisite amount of uninterrupted sleep.

2. Interruptions to the Sleep Opportunity That Are Not Caused by Carrier

A4A, APA, and AE asked whether an interruption not from the air carrier, such as a hotel fire alarm, would interrupt the 8-hour sleep opportunity. A4A and AE asked whether the flightcrew member is required to inform the carrier if a sleep opportunity has been interrupted.

Subsection 117.25(f) requires a flightcrew member to notify the air carrier if the flightcrew member determines that his/her rest period will not provide 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep. This section provides the flightcrew member with discretion to determine whether his or her sleep has been interrupted. However, if the flightcrew member determines that his/her sleep has been interrupted, then the flightcrew member must notify the air carrier of the interruption. For this determination, it is irrelevant whether the interruption to the flightcrew member’s sleep was caused by the air carrier.

Taking the fire alarm example, if the fire alarm sounds for only a few seconds, some flightcrew members may have no problem getting back to sleep, and they may determine that their sleep was not interrupted. Conversely, other flightcrew members may find it difficult to get back to sleep even if their sleep was interrupted for only a short period of time. These flightcrew members may determine that their sleep opportunity was interrupted, at which point they would have to notify the carrier of the interruption.

If you're tired, don't fly.

 

Okaaay. We have been over this before...

Did you account for the other things in C2012, balanced against the six grand?

And do you fly reserve? Because that pays more as well, ALV minus two. That is an increase.

The Average Daily Guarantee protects junior guys from getting lines that pay less than reserve. That is an increase.

If you are junior, the new manning formula creates more lines, and that is certainly worth something to commuters.

And if you fly the 88, you get the 90 rate. Sort of an increase. You still have to fly a Mad Dog, and wonder "what is it doing now?"

More pay for vacation, training, SLI, and sick leave. Do you sense a trend? Because those are increases too.

88 Boeing 717s. That's a bunch of first time captains, each with a bigger W2 than the year before.

19.7 percent on top of those things, the cumulative hourly pay increases over the life of the TA. Two percent of that is what your profit sharing added up to in costing the agreement, and I would trade it all away for higher rates any day of the week! Profit sharing has rarely been a windfall for pilots, and I would rather have pay protected during downturns in the economy.

19.7 percent is the second biggest increase in our group's history, and the initial raise is bigger than the day-one increases of C2K.

And what if you are wrong in your assumptions that we should have sent it back? What if that resulted in no deal, and a three year wait for the NMB? Because that would incur a burden of 37 percent on the subsequent TA, just to crawl back to what you rejected in C2012, not including the improvements outside of hourly rates, which assumes more than I am guilty of assuming.

I don't think anything about C2012 "helps" the DPA. They decided to make the contract a political issue, and a referendum on ALPA, and they lost.

The DPA is now reduced to getting kicked out of lounges in domiciles where they aren't based, and threatening ALPA volunteers with subpoenas and seizure of property for their wackaloon hacking lawsuit. They don't have the cards, they don't have answers to the hard questions about actually running a union or negotiating a contract, but they do have to pay off Lee Seham.

 

How much QOL loss resulted from ALV+15 (sold by DALPA as only used in international categories)? How about the harrassment caused by the "good faith" sick leave verification? DALPA told us it wouldn't happen. Then they told us it wasn't happening. Finally, they had to admit it was happening..and couldn't do anything about it; the loophole was massive. How about 7 short calls? There's a massive giveback...after we just negotiated for 6 in the merger.

The minor (especially when compared to the company's massive success) improvements are more than offest by QOL and productivity concessions. Bundle that with our profit sharing punt, and C12 is stacking up as a miserable, shortsighted failure. At least we rushed to get it done. You know, "fleeting opportunities" and all..

But thanks for the DALPA sales job rehash. Good times.

 

Ha! I just realized johnso29 is to DALPA as TC is to DPA. They're constantly stepping on their schwantzes and crippling their respective causes.

 

Yet we gave when we didn't have to give in the face of the company positioned (and it did come to fruition) to make more money than it ever has. If you would admit that, we can move on. That is the whole point here.

The 717s weren't guaranteed by the contract, so I'm going to stop you right there on any points you're trying to make about that.

I will concede that there were improvements for rsvs and the ADG was better than nothing. I'm on the airbus and most of the time a lineholder... I avoid trips where it goes below 5:15 a day unless it's for a green slip.

The DPA is self mitigating, but the attitudes and spin by ALPA guys have done nothing but promote their cause. The C2012 spin was worth almost 1000 DPA cards all on its own. If you check the sales job at the door, you're doing us all a favor.

btw- we ARE allowed in lounges of places where we aren't based- what's your point there? That's a very bad precedent if that is the justification for them getting booted.

 

johnso is a work right now, he facebook messaged me that he was not correct. Said he'll come eat crow later when he gets to the layover.

Kudos for admitting the error, johnso!

 

You mean if we had just asked we could have kept the higher profit sharing? I wish I had known that!
On a more serious note the numbers above are also wrong. We had 3.4 billion in profit per the agreed method of accounting. I am surprised since all the company had to do was ask, they did not change it to the actual profit reported. That would have knocked the profit sharing checks down even more!

 

Show your math and source, please.

I'm going to ignore the attitude.