![]() |
Originally Posted by intrepidcv11
(Post 1199312)
Wow just wow. I can't believe you guys are being bought by vgue SWA pay parity claims and DAL spin sponsored by ALPA. Then again I shouldn't be surprised given how screwed this profession has become. Jeff Sismek thanks you for the scope 'victory' you are achieving...:rolleyes:
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1199327)
I assume you meant vague. The payrates seem pretty clear to me. When you include the DC money (which IS real money btw...) our 737 pilots will be paid more than SWA 737 pilots. No spin.. fact. I did the math all on m own before reading the ALPA publication.
And why would Smisek be thanking us for the scope deal? It would mean that in order to pattern bargain he would have to put limits on HIS RJ flying.. but he is not worried though, the dysfunction at UCAL is palpable, and he knows that he won't have to worry about any of that for another 4-5 years. |
Originally Posted by hockeypilot44
(Post 1199398)
Why do our MD-88/MD-90 pilots make less than Southwest? We fly the same type of routes as Southwest while flying 149/160 people while the Southwest guys are flying 137 people. Our aircraft also have premium seats (first class) while the Southwest jet is all coach. That should count for something. Our 737 pilots will not make what the Southwest pilots make until 2015. Will the Southwest pilots get a raise by then?
I have no idea whether they will get a raise by then. I will betcha this though.. it won't be anything huge if they do. But I would also be willing to bet it would be something on the order that would cause a guy like you to have a cardiac arrest. (because it will be so low) They have been hitting singles for many many years, and it has gotten to where they are now. You wanna swing for the fence with a short term deal. (Babe Ruth also lead the league in strike outs..) Turn this down.. swing for the fence, but be ready to walk back to the dugout too. Interesting that NOW it is the M88s that have to be competitive with SWA. Time will tell where they are going anyway. The 717s leaving... 737s delayed... growth? mmmmmkay.. From where will that come? Couple that with Ichan's statement that they need to be more cost conscious yada yada yada... Oh, and their contract is amendable in August I believe. Have you heard ANYTHING about their negotiations? Have they exchanged openers? Are they even discussing it? Or will it be some kin of back room deal that would have you lighting a torch and reaching for your pitchfork on your way to DALPA HQ if it happened here? Aren't you leaving anyway? I don't see how you can stand to be here with so many caving military yes men. |
Originally Posted by DALMD88FO
(Post 1199162)
“One of the keys to Delta’s success in recent years has been our collective ability to work harder and smarter for our customers and for Delta’s long-term success,” Richard said. “Our pilots will contribute additional productivity enhancements to help us continue to manage our costs effectively. These productivity enhancements combined with the ability to restructure our domestic network, and retire inefficient 50-seat aircraft, add 717s and 76 seaters, provide significant value to Delta to cover the costs of our employee investments.”
5.25.2012 Why didn't these productivity enhancements equate to better pay raises for the pilot group, instead of mediocre pay raises for all the groups. I'm tired of playing the socialist game. Carl |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1199327)
I assume you meant vague. The payrates seem pretty clear to me. When you include the DC money (which IS real money btw...) our 737 pilots will be paid more than SWA 737 pilots. No spin.. fact. I did the math all on m own before reading the ALPA publication.
And why would Smisek be thanking us for the scope deal? It would mean that in order to pattern bargain he would have to put limits on HIS RJ flying.. but he is not worried though, the dysfunction at UCAL is palpable, and he knows that he won't have to worry about any of that for another 4-5 years. |
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1199363)
You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I don't agree with you.
Im trying to understand those who disagree with me in regards to scope. Can you elaborate on that answer? Do you not think that management wants to outsource our jobs? Do you think that if they try for additional outsourcing (bigger RJ"s) on the next contract that DALPA will say no? Why? Not trying to be a smart a$$, really trying to understand. To me this TA allows more mainline jets to be outsourced, as the 70 + seater should of never been allowed to DCI imo. FB |
Originally Posted by Free Bird
(Post 1199507)
Johnso
Im trying to understand those who disagree with me in regards to scope. Can you elaborate on that answer? Do you not think that management wants to outsource our jobs? Do you think that if they try for additional outsourcing (bigger RJ"s) on the next contract that DALPA will say no? Why? Not trying to be a smart a$$, really trying to understand. To me this TA allows more mainline jets to be outsourced, as the 70 + seater should of never been allowed to DCI imo. FB I believe it's an overall improvement in scope because we said NO to 82 seat RJs, reduced the total amount of DCI hulls, tightened JV and Codeshare language, and tightened overall language. I'm not concerned about just small scope. I'm worried about all scope. I agree that the 70+ seater should have never been allowed to DCI, but I was not allowed to be part of that decision. Unfortunately, it's gone now. We as a pilot group aren't getting help from anyone either. We as profession will be lucky if AMR doesn't get their way in BK. They're asking for 255 51-88 seat RJs. APA is willing to give up 308 51-81 seat aircraft in ADDITION to 352 70 seat aircraft. That's not what Delta or NWA gave up in BK. If we call management's bluff, and AMR gets in between what they're asking for and what APA is asking for, how do you think RA's scope proposal will look then? Just food for thought. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1199313)
Intrepid,
Any suggestions other than vote "No" and enter holding until we see what you do? Where are you at in your negotiations (serious question). Are we helping or hurting? Our 76 seat line is status quo for us. |
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1199367)
When you guys finally get one list, a joint contract, and something to block up those code share holes on your international flying, then you can talk. Right now you need to focus on your disaster.
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1199327)
I assume you meant vague. The payrates seem pretty clear to me. When you include the DC money (which IS real money btw...) our 737 pilots will be paid more than SWA 737 pilots. No spin.. fact. I did the math all on m own before reading the ALPA publication.
And why would Smisek be thanking us for the scope deal? It would mean that in order to pattern bargain he would have to put limits on HIS RJ flying.. but he is not worried though, the dysfunction at UCAL is palpable, and he knows that he won't have to worry about any of that for another 4-5 years. "We will be responsive to the impact of the new Delta TA in our negotiations and will need to adjust our current contract proposal to be competitive with the Delta TA. Our proposal will include significant pay rate increases that are competitive with the new Delta TA, as well as scope and work rules that are competitive with the new Delta TA and permit us to remain competitive in the airline business." I can assure you until DAL ALPA got involved our stance was no more big RJ's period. You guys pass this and the NMB will put us on ice for that stance as the 90 seat hull will be overly shown as outsource only. Man I hope that carrot tastes good. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:23 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands