Airline Pilot Central Forums - Want to see what Delta pilots made in 1994?

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Major (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/)

- - Want to see what Delta pilots made in 1994? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/67764-want-see-what-delta-pilots-made-1994-a.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by seamonster (Post 1200684)

Management looks at past successes and failures to plot their future track.
Why not the pilots?

No, management is making plans to do things with or without us, and the NMB is not planning to help us quickly if we need it. You need to read the LAX LEC thread to help you understand this TA's process and implications.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg (Post 1200689)

It's hard to compare the past when the present and past weren't exactly the same. Scope wasn't a big issue back then, BKs weren't as common, and age 65 wasn't enacted. You just can't compare the two. Sorry, times have changed, and adapting to current problems should be our focus, not focusing on past pay rates. Was there a Skyteam Alliance back then? That there has more affect on our future pilot growth than almost any issue. DL pilots didn't even know what a code share was in 1994.

You are right.

Houses cost more now.
Gas costs more now.
Groceries cost more now.
College costs more now.
Cars cost more now.
Need I continue?

To top the change theme you started. bNow we have to take care of our own retirement.

Everything has changed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by seamonster (Post 1200690)

Signing bonus?

We are currently in the 4th year of a 4 year contract, we got a 4% raise in Jan of this year. The amendable date for our current contract is this upcoming Dec 31st. So, the extra 4% this year if this passes could be described that way. By the way, normal contract talks take over 2 years to negotiate normally after the amendable date. If the TA doesn't pass and it goes back and does take that long, that will be like leaving a 20% pay raise on the table. Crazy!

Quote:

Originally Posted by seamonster (Post 1200694)

If you didn't change your spending habits after 9-11 and a BK, then you are way behind the power curve. This isn't 1994 anymore. Ask the AA pilots if they will now change theirs? You are right though, those things are more expensive now. Think how much more you could buy with a 20% raise in only 3 years, compared to delays if the company doesn't want to renegotiate and we ask the NMB for help.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg (Post 1200701)

If you didn't change your spending habits after 9-11 and a BK, then you are way behind the power curve. This isn't 1994 anymore.

Well, at least we know where you're coming from - acceptance of the post-BK "new normal." That seems to be DALPA's position as well. Not everyone is quite so ready to lie down and take it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg (Post 1200701)

I live well below my means. I have always lived below my means, even before 9/11.

I thought you did not want to look at the past, ie. 9/11, BK and 1994 pay..

Can you make up you mind as to whether or not you want to look at the past.

Quote:

Originally Posted by seamonster (Post 1200674)

The commonly used expression, "Those who ignore history are bound (or doomed) to repeat it" is actually a mis-quotation of the original text written by George Santayana, who, in his Reason in Common Sense, The Life of Reason, Vol.1, wrote "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Rooted in the philosophies of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and many others to follow, his biography (1863-1952)

Unfortunately, those who do remember the past may go ahead and repeat it anyway, because they think they are smarter than the last bunch and so it will be different this time. :o

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg (Post 1200689)

It's hard to compare the past when the present and past weren't exactly the same. Scope wasn't a big issue back then, BKs weren't as common, and age 65 wasn't enacted. You just can't compare the two. Sorry, times have changed, and adapting to current problems should be our focus, not focusing on past pay rates. Was there a Skyteam Alliance back then? That there has more affect on our future pilot growth than almost any issue. DL pilots didn't even know what a code share was in 1994.

Doesn't seem to be today either.....

Have the other airlines in Skyteam grown as fast as the regionals you outsource too? Comparatively speaking.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 1200682)

If your referencing the TA the proper rates to use are the 1 Jan rates since that is the amendable date. The 1 July raise is essentially a signing bonus.

NO, it is not a signing bonus. It is to "offset" the cut they are making to your profit sharing payout.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg (Post 1200696)

You are buying into the scare tactics. Good pilot. Fall in line. Put your hat back on, and shine those shoes.

Seriously...the sky is not falling. Both sides are reasonable.

If we send it back, we can get the areas we have issues with refined. Not having a deal is a bad idea for the Company as well - and it is bad for SWA because they are "stuck" with 717's they don't want, and ALPA national (dues), and all those RJ guys at DCI who are like grapes on the vine, withering away...and us (we want pay and we want it now). Don't buy into the Company "all or nothing" line...we can fix scope so it is at least better than the current offer (or maybe we can even hold the line!)...we can increase the pay rates...we can get rid of that 7th short-call day they are adding, we can get rid of the profit sharing cut...

If we all band together and vote NO, we can show our solidarity and the Company will know they have to make us a better offer. The Company needs the lift. They need 717's or 319's. They are stuck with 255 70-76 seat RJ's and the 50 seaters are not viable in this fuel market, refinery or no refinery. We had to accept massive cuts post 9/11. We are working under a concessionary contract right now. We have the upper hand now. Let's use it. Vote NO.