Delta's 76 Seat Pay
 

Haven't you guys negotiated payrates for the CRJ-900? If the company wants to get out of bad lease agreements for the crj-200 and can only do so by getting more 76 seaters then why not just tell management to go ahead and buy them since you've already agreed to payrates for them not once but at least twice now. Why have them unless you are just using them as a pacifier of hope. Sounds like you guys already have a hard cap at 255 for the 76 seaters. If you think you could have a hard cap at 450 (new # I think) if this passes, ask yourself this question. Did you think you had a hard cap at 255 (70/76 seaters) when the last contract was being presented to you? Hard Caps on anything are only hard if you enforce it.

Its because of ALPA National's commitments under the RJDC lawsuit settlement.
Same reason we have a clause requiring us to hire 35% ALPA DCI pilots in every class.

We can't "recapture" too much scope too fast or ALPA will get sued.
The same old ALPA conflict of interest we've been discussing for years.

Who would be the flight attendants and mechanics for our 76 seat operation? How would it work? What would the costs be? How about we use those costs to get more mainline planes instead, and just put a limit on the RJs?

Bill, why have any Delta employees at all?

Bill, a 90-seat jet is a mainline aircraft, at least it used to be.

So instead of having the cost of having 76seaters at mainline you want to use that money to get more planes at mainline instead?

50 seat airplanes use to be mainline airplanes to....way back in the day... :cool:

If the flight attendants and mechanics were delta employees on your 76seat operation the costs would probably be the same regardless of the aircraft 76-300 seats. Of course the 300 seat airplane would have more flight attendants on it.

Are you recapturing the 76 seater or just getting to the limit that was set in the contract and telling management that you'll fly any more than that?

This just seems like bizarre thinking. Who's gonna be the flight attendants and mechanics for your 717 operation? I would say that any additional 76 seaters would work the same way any other airplane in your fleet would.

Good question on the cost. Your company has already agreed to pay rates for the pilots at least twice and I would assume the rest of your company would still make the same pay. Do the flight attendants and mechanics make different pay when they work on the 747 vs. md88? Or are you asking about the cost (outsourcing) that could help save the company money, which in turn helps you get a bigger pay raise or better work rules. If it is the latter then that is pretty weak asking others to work for less so you can make more money.

Those would be more mainline airplanes if you got them.

Turbo props used to be mainline as well.....

The original mainliner:

1 seat!

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviatio.../4/1470443.jpg


Regards,
Clutch

The 76s aren't worth recapturing IMHO. The payrates wouldn't be worth it to mainline pilots.. unless we were hiring right into the left seat.

I don;t think we should allow any more at DCI.. but I wouldn't spend a nickle to get 'em on the property here.

That's unfortunate. Was it only 10 years ago Northwest flew the DC-9-10 at mainline with 12 in first and 60 in coach? Now you outsource a fleet of those (with 4 more seats and 1,000nm more range) in twice the numbers of any existing mainline fleet.

I would....

You won't have to fly 'em for $50/hour either.

My comment was mostly just rhetorical.
The scope hawks speak of recapturing small gauge flying. This TA proves that ALPA is not going to follow that path.
We have Embraer 190 and CRJ900 pay rates in our contract but that is just a symbolic gesture. Nobody really believes we are ever going to fly those jets.

Speculation and conjecture:
Moak and management got together during the early days of "constructive engagement" and agreed on the "two tiered industry" model back during the bankruptcy. His followers still control the Delta MEC administration. They think it is best that smaller jets be flown at separate "feeder" airlines. Management always wanted to do this but ALPA decided to officially go along.
They don't say it out loud but they believe outsourcing is good. I think the reasoning maybe goes something like this: Mainline "top end" wages and benefits are best preserved and increased by not trying to apply them to every pilot all the way down to the smallest jets. The RJs can not be flown profitably in large numbers if the pilots, flight attendants, mechanics, gate agents, etc. are making too much money. We would rather have a high paid mainline and a lower paid feeder system than to combine them all together and be forced to accept a wage and benefit structure that would support everything from RJs up to the 777s. With a two tier industry the mainline jobs will (eventually) be much more lucrative and the feeder jobs will be much more plentiful. The industry overall is larger and healthier and for individual pilots its almost like an apprenticeship system that unions have had for decades. The RJ guys serve their time and can eventually apply and move to mainline.

I don't really know, I'm just guessing and I probably didn't articulate that very well but it seems to be a possible explanation for why ALPA does what it does.
The RJ wages would be too much of a drag on the 747 wages if we try to have them all on the same pay table. The disparity would be too glaring. Better to have that $300/hour job available and not have it be directly compared to a $40/hour job.

Back to the neighborhood beer and barbecue circuit. I've gained 10 pounds this weekend. Today's festivities are at my house. Gotta fire up the grill.

$50/hr to fly it at mainline? Sounds crazy. Capts on the 50 seaters make $100/hr at my regional...

The CRJ900 is listed as 76 seats in a two class arrangement.
So, if you allow the increase of those aircraft at the DCI carriers due to Scope relaxation.. you are removing a potential aircraft that is on your mainline payscale.

Again, why would anyone ever vote YES on a contract proposal that allows for more larger aircraft to be operated at a Contract Carrier instead of your own seniority list?

Motch

Lets HURRY UP!! We need to HURRY UP and give away larger aircraft, for a small raise. The time is of essence. Rush, Rush, Rush. In 3 years, we will slap ourselves and regret it, AGAIN!!:D:D

TEN

They aren't worth it for you because you will never fly them being a 767 CA.

Do you think it's worth it to the junior pilots on the seniority list? I'm guessing they'd probably like to fly those airplanes rather than be on the street in the event of a furlough. How about not continuing to make the industry worse for future pilots?

You wouldn't spend a nickle to get them on property but how much are you gaining/gained in your paycheck by allowing them to be outsourced? It's ok for others to get whipsawed as long as you get yours? Is that what you are saying?

Eric Stratton, I've wondered for a long time where you sit on our seniority list, or if you're even on our list. Care to share that?

They sure didn't spend a nickle on them this time either considering the pay rate bumps....

I've seen your proposed pay rates and there isn't a $50 rate on those airplanes. At the end of this proposed contract they'll be $70 something starting.

Nope because it shouldn't matter where I am. Does it matter if I'm at Delta or another Major or at the regionals still? Does it make the argument more or less valid depending on where I'm at? I hope you do answer these questions.

Why continue to erode the industry? Yes you are getting rid of the 50 seaters but even your management seems to be putting out information that they don't want them. Like someone said earlier the dc9-10 was similar in size and it paid what all the other dc9's did.

You guys had a limit on this equipment and payrates for them. If the company wants more then why not just say "fine, we'll take them seen as you have already agreed to a pay scale."

I'm thinking you're either a wannabe or a student at an aviation university. No way you're an airline pilot.

Please expand.

forgot to add that I was hoping you would answer those questions.

I've seen your posts on here for quite a while, and while I can't place my finger on it, it seems like they're the questions of an outsider. They reflect an academic knowledge of our business, but not a firsthand and practical knowledge.

You tend to come on here and stir things up, then disappear for a while. Now I realize that this is a free board, and you have every right to be here, but I've just always been curious whether you're an airline pilot, and it seems that you've confirmed it-- you're not.

As to answering your questions-- No, I don't think so. I feel little need to justify or defend my thoughts on those matters to most people, and much less to you.

Deleted

deleted

deleted

I get what you are saying. Most people I've met only look north and not south on the seniority list which makes it easy for them to let go of airplanes they will never fly.

I had heard that Moak made a comment saying the reason Delta hired after bankruptcy was that they loosened scope and the reason American hadn't hired or turned the corner is because they hadn't loosened scope. Can't verify but I heard it from a couple Delta guys. You seem to elude to that as well.

Hope you enjoyed the bbq.

Moak said it at the C44 meeting where some of the 07 hires here presented and passed the resolution calling for the study of recapturing 76 seat flying (which Moak & Co thereafter ignored). He actually said it before the resolution was presented, but he knew it was on the agenda and threw that comment in as part of a sort of "state of the union" presentation that was basically crowing about how much smarter DALPA was than those dummies at UAL, CAL, and AA.

Sorry to burst your bubble but I do work for the airlines. That's something I'll freely admit. Just not who I work for.

I didn't expect you to actually answer. More or less for the reason that you probably don't have a good explanation as to why it would matter if I was a regional FO or a widebody CA. I do find it funny though that you feel little need to justify or defend your thoughts on here. Isn't that what this board basically does....justify or defend peoples thoughts about whats going on in this industry?

What is the firsthand/practical knowledge that I'm missing? Because I've seen firsthand how the outsourcing has hurt the current group of pilots as well as any future pilots. This is not an industry I would recommend to anyone because of the outsourcing that has taken place in the last 20 years.

Clearly he missed the fact that CAL hadn't give in past the 50 seat jet and then hired 25% of their pilot group after 2005.

I would have loved to have brought that point up.

And you refer to me as a one dimensional thinker? You'd have to gain a dimension to be a one dimensional thinker.

Sad.

Carl

CAll 'em as I see 'em buddddddy.

So, OK.. I think the extra $50/hour should be taken out of the 747 pay since Carl has a fully funded DB plan, is gonna get 14% DC... and is making $80 per hour more than the nearest competitor.. and that money should be used to bring up the 76 seaters to a liveable wage.

Yes.. you are... sad... and one dimensional.

I have not been reading the forums over the holiday weekend but would like to through something into the pot. In my extended family, I have some people on the management side of labor, big business and not applebees. I showed them parts of the TA and the change from our old contract. They laughed at how little we receive with the leverage we had. They had been casually reading about the Delta news for awhile, because I am a pilot with Delta.

Before all of the YES voters go running to the polls. Talk to people who are not in aviation, both in management and labor. They will give you the correct reality check. Management wins BIG with this one and we, as Mongo would say,” are just pawns in where choo choo go”

square, you keep bringing up Carl's DB plan in many, many threads..... jealous? That was negotiated during NWA's bankruptcy. DAL had the opportunity. GET OVER IT!

Oh BTW, you make quite a bit more than the nearest competitor too.....

As I said, I've just been curious as to your background. You've all but admitted that you're not a Delta pilot. Furthermore, I'm still unconvinced that you're a pilot at all. Oh well. It's your right to not answer me.

This board is not a place for me to defend or justify my thoughts, or to convince anyone that they should be thinking like me. I'm on here to gather information. Usually, I'm looking for rumors. Since the TA was released, I'm here looking at interpretations of various contract sections, with an emphasis on potential loopholes. I see a lot of good in this contract, as well as several things I don't like; in the end I may decide that the good outweighs the bad, and vote for this thing.

I don't think anyone looking at this TA considers it enough of a slam dunk to not only vote yes, but to encourage others to do so. I'm certainly in that camp; I'm happy to let every Delta pilot decide for themselves. You, on the other hand, are clearly an outsider, yet seem to be encouraging Delta pilots to vote against this TA. That's easy for you to do; you don't have to live under the resulting contract.

That's ok if you don't think I'm an airline pilot. For some reason if I said who I work for you probably wouldn't believe that either. Not sure what it would take and it doesn't bother me either way. I find it interesting that people seem to have more of a problem of me not saying who I work for than the message I'm talking about. (specifically outsourcing)

I wouldn't beat around the bush and not admit that I think you guys should vote this down for the sole reason of allowing more 76 seat airplanes out there. For along time people have always countered me when I bring up scope erosion as a thing of bankruptcy or bad contracts and yet Delta may offer up more 76 seaters in a time when the airline is talking about very large profits. Has your Union even/ever offered up what it would cost to bring those extra 76 seaters on property or on the flip side, how much more will you make by allowing those to be whipsawed at the regionals?

I think it is a very naive statement to think you (delta) are the only ones that have to live under the resulting contract. Every regional pilot has to live under the contracts that Delta, United, Northwest, Continental, American and USAirways has signed over the last 20 years in regards to scope. Just look how the majors have shrunk and the regionals have exploded over that time frame and honestly tell me that you (the majors) are the only ones that have to live with that resulting contract.

To tell you the truth, I could really care less about what the effect of voting on this TA has on other groups. Not like they have raised the bar AT ALL for us to build on, at least since the JCBA. It's kinda like I don't care what the Public thinks about this either. The question is, is it good for the Delta Pilot group or not? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder....

Denny