I would hope that DALPA is talking to SWAPA. Maybe they're cooperating. Avg W-2's are an easy metric, the rest gets complicated because we seem to have different paradigms on a lot of issues.

I would hope so, too. FWIW, I've tried to understand your pay system, but it's still clear as mud to me. We're left with searching for a metric by which to compare vastly different contracts. Are W2s a good metric? I'm not sure.

So far, Georgetg's method of comparison (PCASM)is the best ammunition that I've seen.

LJ,

There was a guy on our DALPA Forum who took the initiative to call your SWAPA President and discuss this pay issue. Your guy was adamant that the numbers stated in your Air Tran welcome packet are absolutely accurate. He also said that DPA had contacted SWAPA, but ALPA had not.

Like you said, with such an important contract and so much ground needed to be made up for us, I can't for the life of me understand why DALPA wouldn't be all over this! Instead, they try to sweep it under the rug and we get big DALPA supporters like Sailingfun and Alfa Romeo trying to dispute SWAPA's data and tout the MIT/government data source. Something is rotten in Denmark (actually, Herndon and Virginia Ave) and it doesn't bode well for our upcoming negotiations. :(

BTW, thank you for coming here and attempting to set the record straight. You are my new BFF! :D

I think you're probably right. I would guess that when the new numbers are released though, SWA will probably be able to show more productivity (ASM's) per pilot. Of course, Delta has larger aircraft and longer stage-length, so maybe that number will be offset. I would think that the ideal metric for DALPA would be CASM for narrow body aircraft. If SWA pilots are more productive in ASM's per pilot for narrow bodies, then the CASM number would still understate the benefits and additional costs that are in the Form 41 data.

Ideal for Delta pilots would be stage-adjusted narrow-body total cockpit cost per available seat mile.

I am way too spring-loaded into a defensive position on here.:o

The funny part about it is that you can actually still call SWA and talk to the person who is in charge of submitting Form 41 data, even without identifying yourself.

LJ,

Can't imagine why you'd be defensive with some of attacks you've been exposed to. :)

We get involved in your threads/forums and appreciate your being involved in ours because information about your contract, scope, pay, benefits, etc. is critical to us (DALPA) getting ready to negotiate the first non-BK legacy contract in over 10 years. For us, this is a critical contract to our financial future and we can't always rely on the union to give us all the information we need to make an informed decision.

Thanks for taking the time to contribute.

No, that was the alpa welcome packet to the air tran pilots.:p

How anyone can defend alpa (even though not stated), and mention what is going on with airtran/ swa, is truly beyond belief.

Why on earth is it so difficult for DALPA to internalize and educate Delta pilots that SWA pilots make an absolute a$$wad load more money than delta pilots with better workrules and scope...forget narrowbody, widebody and international.

I know why, but I still cant figure it out.

There is no valid excuse for the defense of the expectation management.

I loathe the blind shilling. If the job of restoration is too difficult for DALPA they should admit it.

A couple of years ago, the usual suspects on the DALPA forum were pretty much out in the open with their assertion that the kind of numbers necessary for restoration are "not realistic" for us to achieve. Now, they are a little more subtle about it. But it is in effect a tacit admission that they believe restoration is unachievable. They just have more severe political consequences now if they come out and say it in so many words.

Haven't they already? I mean not directly, but in form of actions.

Restoration, however deserved, is not the right stratedgy/rhetoric IMO. We should stick to SWA plus reasonable premiums in all areas, SWA pay rates plus reasonable premius for small narrowbody planes and up from there and SWA scope and work rules...plus a reasonable premium.

Its much harder for a Stockholm'd pilot or a manager alike to make the case as to why we can't afford that without accusing or admitting (as the case may be) that its a management talent issue. And that stratedgy plays straight to the NMB's heart. Battle cries for "restoration" because "we deserve it" and back in the glory days you could get a Caddilac for a month's pay and all that not only serve no strategic purpose, it ends up being equal to or less than SWA plus reasonable premiums anyway...especially when you include scope. All flying on 01-01-13 belongs to us and we will end up getting a massive portion of our oursourced flying back and each and every seat the company wishes to have at DCI, AK or in a JV will have to be "paid for" by the company because the baseline is SWA plus reasonable premiums and it is indefensible to say we can't have what a ruthless industry dominant competitor has.