|
Originally Posted by Elvis90
(Post 1200065)
Did you have a threshold for a yes vote before this TA came out? Mine was a 30% raise and no increase in DCI. That's what I put in my survey. What did you put down?
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. |
Originally Posted by flyingdaddy810
(Post 1200064)
More suppositions. You can only count eggs that are in your basket! Can you really say that reducing the total seats at DCI and capturing some of that flying at the mainline is a bad thing? What, you really thing you can capture all of the DCI flying now? If we can do it at all, it will be done in incriments. Let's build on what we can capture now.
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 |
Originally Posted by flyingdaddy810
(Post 1200064)
More suppositions. You can only count eggs that are in your basket! Can you really say that reducing the total seats at DCI and capturing some of that flying at the mainline is a bad thing? What, you really thing you can capture all of the DCI flying now? If we can do it at all, it will be done in incriments. Let's build on what we can capture now.
|
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. |
Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg
(Post 1200627)
A 3 year contract worth 19.7% (22% for MD88 guys like me who get a bump up to MD90 pay)
still a "no" from me. |
Originally Posted by hockeypilot44
(Post 1200700)
I I am now anti-ALPA for life.
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. |
Originally Posted by Bluto
(Post 1200044)
Also, growing the >70-seat fleet at DCI is a good step towards getting the 76-seaters at mainline? Uh, I can only call that theory 'interesting'. If anything I see this TA as the final nail in the coffin of recapturing that flying. What am I missing?
Originally Posted by Elvis90
(Post 1200050)
Steve Dickson stated that the 717 purchase will offset the flying done by the loss of 50-seaters. The same can hold true for additional 76-seaters...leave the current cap at 255 and gets additional lift through, say, A319's. We don't need any more DCI.
Originally Posted by flyingdaddy810
(Post 1200064)
More suppositions. You can only count eggs that are in your basket! Can you really say that reducing the total seats at DCI and capturing some of that flying at the mainline is a bad thing? What, you really thing you can capture all of the DCI flying now? If we can do it at all, it will be done in incriments. Let's build on what we can capture now.
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.
Originally Posted by Rama
(Post 1201010)
Airline pilot negotiation rule #1: Do not give up scope!
Please learn from history. 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. |
Originally Posted by WideRide
(Post 1201025)
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. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:46 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands