So, keep the money losing 50 seaters? Should we should fly the 76 seaters? How much would that cost? Would it be a mainline operation or would we fly as a special "group" in a DCI regional operation? Should we put 717s on routed like ATL to Killeen or Meridian? Some routes can't sustain a 717.

As far as pay goes, it was underwhelming. How long of a contract do you think your 30% raise would be? Was that your first year amount? A 3 year contract worth 19.7% (22% for MD88 guys like me who get a bump up to MD90 pay) is pretty good, especially when it starts 6 months early. Something to think about, the duration of the contract. 19% for 4 years wouldn't have been great, and our current contract was 17% for a 4 year deal, which didn't have the improvements this TA has.

 

this must be flame bait, you can't be that ignorant about the scope sale in this TA

you don't even need smoke and mirrors, they tell you straight they will add 70 large rjs

so what about 50 seats and turbo prop, they are parking those as fast as they can on thier own and now we are suppose to give them credit for it with a large RJ expansion?

again you must be baiting

 

Increment #1 is voting no to this TA

 

I don't understand how our negotiators were able to do so bad. They messed up scope and pay horrendously. Those are the two most important things. We could not have done worse. Throw in things like taking a couple days off from reserves in the summer time, forcing those reserves to fly to FAR limits, and adding a seventh shortcall per month, and this thing is downright ugly. Every time I read a notepad from DALPA strongly urging me to vote for it, my blood boils. I am now anti-ALPA for life. I really don't understand how anyone could vote for this. The only logical reason guys are giving is that they are afraid of the unknown and this will raise our hourly rates. The :15 of extra vacation per day is downright insulting to me along with the :30 minutes extra for training pay. If I was on our negotiating committee, I would have walked out the second Delta asked for more 76 seaters. That would have been a non-starter for me. They can take their opportunity and shove it.

 

Voting NO!

 

Airline pilot negotiation rule #1: Do not give up scope!
Please learn from history.

 

great. so the 90 will still make less than the 320, which carries fewer pax.

still a "no" from me.

 

Well, at least ALPA expended our negotiating capital to ensure its own well-being by requiring 35% of new hires be from ALPA carriers.

ALPA's brazen self-preservation without regard for our pilot group is disgusting and infuriating.

 

YOu are missing nothing. You are spot-on. Vote NO!

Agreed!

We cannot capture all DCI flying now, but we can hold the line on 70-76 seat jets. Enough is enough!

Why give them 70 more? For a sub-standard pay-raise and the promise of (small narrowbody) jets that are not on the property yet? The 50 seaters are not money-makers. They will get rid of them as expeditiously as the contracts allow. If we HOLD THE LINE on 70 and 76 seaters, The Company will be forced to buy more SNB's to have the lift capacity they need, or bring 70 and 76 seaters to MAINLINE. Either way, mainline wins. More DAL pilot jobs. Less DCI. Winning.

Yes!

Don't drink the Kool-Aid, guys. Bar graphs, percentages, and other sales tactics from ALPA can appear to be your favorite flavor...with sugar and not that Splenda crap, but in the end you have to cut to the chase: This TA allows 70 and 76 seat RJ's to GO FROM 255 to 325. No bar charts, formulas, or other nonsense required to understand that! Someone please tell me how that is holding the line on scope? - Let's make that a rhetorical question: It is not: It allows FURTHER growth of DCI at the expense of mainline jobs. No ALPA negotiators notepad can sway me otherwise. Either don't fly those big RJ's, or bring them to mainline. If we hold DCI at 255...The Company MUST get more lift at mainline, because they have MAXXED OUT their current allowances of 70 and 76 seat RJ's already, and 50 seaters have too high a CASM and are therefore not a growth threat at current fuel costs.

Our leverage exists NOW. Let's use it. Negotiation involves give-and-take, and we are not an un-reasonable bunch - but let's send this back and get a BETTER deal than this. Don't buy into the scare tactics.

It really irks me that ALPA and The Company are tying the 717's to a ratification of the TA. Don't play games with me. I'm an adult. Vote NO and tell them to bring the 717's on the property anyway as a show of good-faith (which they could have done pre-TA anyway). The Company saw an opportunity to get you, the Delta pilot, to take LESS pay and GIVE UP SCOPE under the promise of new jets, as I told you they would do several weeks ago in the AirTran 717 thread. Don't buy into it.

Vote NO.

 

I agree with you-we will get them anyway or the A319's that are available. They aren't going to screw up their long term plans because we vote this down.