As promised, here's my work. To my surprise, the numbers actually came out higher on the second pass. I should add a caveat, however: I'm neither a mathematician nor an accountant. I thanked the Lord in Heaven when I passed Differential Equations by the skin of my teeth.

I passed on your request to convert everything to cash and redo the math for two reasons: #1, the added complexity would give me another opportunity to screw things up, and #2 I would like to drink at least some beer on this layover.

Anyway, I invite you to scrutinize my math and find the errors. I'm sure there are many.

On a related note, I was wrong about Scope in my original post. Alaska doesn't go from 50% to 30%. On SEA-MSP and SEA-ATL, it stays at 50%. On SEA-LAX, there is no limit. It could be 100%. Consequently, I don't know how to calculate an accurate number.

===

+20.7% Pay Chart + Defined DCI = 19.7% cumulative increase in straight pay, +1% defined contribution per “Negotiator’s Notepad: Compensation.”

-2% Profit Sharing Loss per “Negotiator’s Notepad: Compensation.”

+.375% Vacation Pay. This is wrong. It’s actually +3.5%. Per “TA 2012i.pdf,” this TA adds 3.5 hours in the vacation bank for people with 0-5 years with the company. Assuming a 1000-hr year, (3.5/1000)*100% = +.35%

+.1% Per Diem. This is wrong. Per “TA2012i.pdf,” current domestic per diem = $2.00/hr. On 1 JAN 2014, that becomes $2.20/hr. Per APC’s pay table, I make $111/hr. Add current per diem, and that’s $113/hr. On 1 JAN 2014, that becomes $113.2/hr. 1- (113/113.2) * 100% = +.17%

+3.1% Sick Leave. 125 hrs @ 75% pay = 93.75 hrs. 100% pay brings that back to 125 hrs. 125-93.75=31.25. Assuming a 1000-hr year, (31.25/1000)*100%=+3.125%

+.1% Distance Learning + CQ. This is wrong. The correct number is +.227%. My April pay statement shows Distance Training Time of 00:38. Assuming I do it 4xyr, that’s 152 minutes total Distance Training Time. Per “Negotiator’s Notepad: Overview,” this pay is increased by 50%. 152min/2=76min. ((76-60)/60) + 1= 1.27. Thus, this represents an increase of 1.27 hrs/yr in today’s rates. Per “TA 2012i.pdf,” credit for a day in the Sims goes from 3:15 to 3:45. Assuming I attend once per yr (I know it’s actually a little more than that, due to the 9-month cycle, but I’m not good enough at math to figure that in.), that’s +1 hr/yr. (2.27/1000)*100%=+.227%.

+8% Reserve Pay. Per “Negotiator’s Notepad: Overview.”

Revised Reserve Total: +33.722%

+10% Avg Daily Guarantee. This is wrong, but your numbers will vary depending on your average schedule. In April, I was assigned NYC 73 Rotations 4414 (3 days, 11:35 block hours) and 4351, and 4415x2. I hurt myself because I forgot that I’m old and had to sick out the Grenaida trip (4351) and the two later Bogota trips (the 4415s). Let’s assume 4351 blocked as much as it did when I flew the trip in March at 9:44, and let’s assume the two later Bogotas (4415x2) blocked as much as the first (4414), at 11:35 apiece. (Note: I took 4 days of mil leave in April, so I could have gotten another of these trips. I’m not accounting for this.) The total block hours of my assigned trips = 31:03. Per ““Negotiator’s Notepad: Overview,” each of these trips would be subject to the Average Daily Guarantee of 4:30/day, for a total of 40:30 block hours. 31:03 = 31.05hrs. 40:30 = 40.5 hrs. 40.5-31.05=9.45. 9.45*12(months)=113.4. Assuming a 1000-hr month, (113.4/1000)*100%=+11.34%.

Revised Line Total: +37.062%

It's really that simple. Fewer lower paying jobs = more higher paying jobs. That concept is beyond ALPA's comprehension.

Gents, I've read your responses and will take some time to chew on them. I hadn't thought of Reserve pay in terms of increased work, and I hadn't thought of Avg Daily Value as reducing my days of work (as opposed to increasing my pay), among other oversights. Thank you.

Regarding narrow-bore scope, I see this TA as an overall improvement. Fewer DCI seats seems like a good thing to me.

Regarding sick pay, I have three young kids and lead an active lifestyle. I get sick. I get injured. That bump in sick pay matters. Will I use all 125 hours in a given year? Probably not, but this faced me with a choice: choose some arbitrary number lower than 125, or go whole hog. I went whole hog.

Again, thanks so much for your considered (and considerate) responses. I look forward to continued analysis of this TA from all sides as we work to arrive at a wise decision.

Don't forget if you use all 125 hours, you will have to participate in the contractually obligated sick verification process. Read all about it in the TA. It's not as simple as just calling in sick when you're sick.

Good points Frank. You're right -- this TA is an improvement, I just expected much more. If it passes, I will salute smartly and carry on...however, for now I plan to share thoughts and exercise my right to vote against it.

For all of the Pros and Cons in regards to the TA, nice job of keeping this thread professional guys!

Your decision about how to vote is your personal decision and I respect that. But I believe you misstated a fact.

If you are comparing the number of 76 seat RJ's Delta can operate at DCI under the current contract to the number that would be allowed if this TA passes then passing this TA decreases the number of 76 seaters, NOT increase.

If mainline were to add 88 B717's they would be able to fly the max cap of 255 76 seaters. This TA puts the limit below that level.

Fly Safe,
ZZ

Very true. The difference is they would need to park 102 70 seat jets.

Technically correct but the bottom line is that there are more total large RJ's. That's the threat/problem which cannot be ignored regardless of semantics and shell games.

Large RJ's can do flying currently performed by Delta mainline due to their economics. But you already knew that from the hundreds of times this fact has been pointed out.

You're absolutely right. Fewer outsourced jobs is what this TA does. More insourced jobs as well. Doing nothing and hoping the 50-seaters go away (after many years) keeps the outsourced flying high.

I'm not voting based on regional pilots, but I would think a smaller DCI is as good for them as it is for us.

It's.... really that simple.