|
Want to see what Delta pilots made in 1994?
I have access to the 1994 Delta pay scales. The current TA is a slap in the face when you look at the 1994 scales.
DC-9 1994 2012(jul in TA) 18yr pay raise captain 158.73 169.57 10.84 FO 108.41 115.81 7.40 |
MD88 1994 2012(jul new TA) 18 yr pay raise
captain 161.79 178.58 16.79 FO 110.50 121.97 11.47 |
I will be posting more when I get the time. I scanned the pay scales from 1994 into my computer but cannot figure out how to post all of them on this site. I will ask my 8 year old how to do that tomorrow. Hopefully I can figure it out sooner than later. If not just ask me via PM what scales you want to know about and I will tell you when I can.
MY VOTE IS NO. |
For someone unfamiliar with the format seamonster, how do I read the 3 numbers across?
USMCFLYR |
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
(Post 1200432)
For someone unfamiliar with the format seamonster, how do I read the 3 numbers across?
USMCFLYR I think you go left to right. Hoooah |
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
(Post 1200432)
For someone unfamiliar with the format seamonster, how do I read the 3 numbers across?
USMCFLYR |
Originally Posted by FreightDawgyDog
(Post 1200500)
third is raise over 18 year period (or difference) between the 2.
|
Originally Posted by FreightDawgyDog
(Post 1200500)
In the Air Force they taught us to go from left to right. :) Looks like 1st number is 1994 rates, 2nd number is new TA rates, and third is raise over 18 year period (or difference) between the 2.
Ah....two different pay rates from past and present. Thanks all. USMCFLYR |
Originally Posted by seamonster
(Post 1200417)
I have access to the 1994 Delta pay scales. The current TA is a slap in the face when you look at the 1994 scales.
DC-9 1994 2012(jul in TA) 18yr pay raise captain 158.73 169.57 10.84 FO 108.41 115.81 7.40 DC9 CA: 158.73(1994) == 247.13(2012) FO: 108.41(1994) == 168.78(2012) MD88 CA: 161.79(1994) == 251.89(2012) FO: 110.50(1994) == 172.04(2012) Reference CPI numbers(Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics) U.S. Price Inflation 1994-2012 1994 = 2.6% 1995 = 2.8% 1996 = 3.0% 1997 = 2.3% 1998 = 1.6% 1999 = 2.2% 2000 = 3.40% 2001 = 2.8% 2002 = 1.6% 2003 = 2.3% 2004 = 2.7% 2005 = 3.40% 2006 = 3.2% 2007 = 2.8% 2008 = 3.8% 2009 = -0.4% 2010 = 1.6% 2011 = 3.2% Another small point on inflation; The effects of inflation are compound. So if you add all the above years up you get 44.9% - but the TRUE rate of inflation over that period of time is actually 55.69%. |
The pay scales that I posted are for 12th year.
|
767ER INT'L 1994 :: Capt 197.27 FO 134.73
767ER INT'L TA as of JUL2012:: Capt 196.52 FO: 134.22 If you fly international you do get the override. CP 6.50 and FO 4.50 JULY 2012(new TA) with Override::: Capt 203.02 FO 138.72 I know that all the 767ER piloots are flying to Erope so make sure you count this override. |
I am not trying to be a closed minded nay sayer, but look at the facts people.
Vote NO. Based on the facts. I hope people bring these numbers up at the Road show. I am still trying to figure out how to post the whole pay scales, but am at a loss. I am sure that ALPA has them in their archives. So just contact ALPA and they will gladly provide you with the old contract. |
Does anyone have a contract from pre 1994?
I know we have pilots hired before 1994. |
Originally Posted by seamonster
(Post 1200664)
I am not trying to be a closed minded nay sayer, but look at the facts people.
Vote NO. Based on the facts. I hope people bring these numbers up at the Road show. I am still trying to figure out how to post the whole pay scales, but am at a loss. I am sure that ALPA has them in their archives. So just contact ALPA and they will gladly provide you with the old contract. Pilots also got reimbursed for laundry and tipping back then.... Big deal! Times have changed, and now our peers can't negotiate out of a paper bag, not helping us at all. 9-11, BK, and age 65 also screwed things up. It's not good to dwell on the past, rather concentrate on going forward and gaining as much as we possibly can within reasonable means. That means reasonable gains thanks to shorter duration contracts, not one big "gold mine" hit at once. Just not going to happen in today's negotiating environment. Ask the AA, UCAL, and US guys what I mean. |
Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg
(Post 1200669)
Pilots also got reimbursed for laundry and tipping back then.... Big deal! Times have changed, and now our peers can't negotiate out of a paper bag, not helping us at all. 9-11, BK, and age 65 also screwed things up. It's not good to dwell on the past, rather concentrate on going forward and gaining as much as we possibly can within reasonable means. That means reasonable gains thanks to shorter duration contracts, not one big "gold mine" hit at once. Just not going to happen in today's negotiating environment. Ask the AA, UCAL, and US guys what I mean.
Read more: Who said Those who ignore history are bound to repeat it |
Bill,
So, when we negotiate a contract we are to start from scratch every time? Throw out everything we know and then start writing a brand new contract? Why wouldn't you refrence the past? Knowing where you have been keeps you from traveling in a circle. |
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)
Read more: Who said Those who ignore history are bound to repeat it |
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.
|
Management looks at past successes and failures to plot their future track.
Why not the pilots? |
Originally Posted by seamonster
(Post 1200680)
Bill,
So, when we negotiate a contract we are to start from scratch every time? Throw out everything we know and then start writing a brand new contract? Why wouldn't you refrence the past? Knowing where you have been keeps you from traveling in a circle. |
Signing bonus?
|
Originally Posted by seamonster
(Post 1200684)
Management looks at past successes and failures to plot their future track.
Why not the pilots? |
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.
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. |
Originally Posted by seamonster
(Post 1200690)
Signing bonus?
|
Originally Posted by seamonster
(Post 1200694)
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. |
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.
|
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. 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.
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. |
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)
|
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.
Have the other airlines in Skyteam grown as fast as the regionals you outsource too? Comparatively speaking. |
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.
Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg
(Post 1200696)
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!
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. |
Curious if someone has the numbers for what the CEO and the top execs made in 1994.
What kind of profits/losses did the company post for FY '94? |
Originally Posted by WideRide
(Post 1201032)
NO, it is not a signing bonus. It is to "offset" the cut they are making to your profit sharing payout.
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. I can't believe how many people are falling for the FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt). Does anybody believe that the company is willing to throw out months of work if we just ask for modest improvements (a few more percent in pay and some tightening of some language) and the certainty of labor peace (which they need for the capital markets and to get rid of the unprofitable 50s - isn't it amazing that the 1.25/1 is EXACTLY what is need ed to bring over 88 717s (which the company wants because they are cheap). I think the risk (no raises for up to two years) outweighs the rewards (giving up the sure raises with concessions in scope and work rules). |
Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg
(Post 1200669)
Pilots also got reimbursed for laundry and tipping back then.... Big deal! Times have changed, and now our peers can't negotiate out of a paper bag, not helping us at all. 9-11, BK, and age 65 also screwed things up. It's not good to dwell on the past, rather concentrate on going forward and gaining as much as we possibly can within reasonable means. That means reasonable gains thanks to shorter duration contracts, not one big "gold mine" hit at once. Just not going to happen in today's negotiating environment. Ask the AA, UCAL, and US guys what I mean.
Bill, One problem with that logic is that's exactly what the company is doing to us with scope. Every new contract we give up just a little bit more. Anyone who believes that the "hard caps" on the RJ's will still be in effect in 10 years is delusional. |
Can anyone post the fares, by RPM, were in '94? Fares are down 18% since 2001 and transcontinental fares today are very nearly what they were just prior to deregulation in '79, same dollars reduced by 33 years of inflation.
GF |
Originally Posted by JungleBus
(Post 1200711)
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.
|
Originally Posted by JungleBus
(Post 1200711)
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.
DALPA has recouped over 53% of what was taken out of the pay tables while AA, CAL, UAL, and LCC have done jack $h!t in that same time. How have YOU raised the bar within your pilot groups' negotiations? |
Originally Posted by NwaBusDriver
(Post 1202844)
Bill,
One problem with that logic is that's exactly what the company is doing to us with scope. Every new contract we give up just a little bit more. Anyone who believes that the "hard caps" on the RJ's will still be in effect in 10 years is delusional. This contract recaptures control of flying that was previously allowed to be outsourced. Period. That is not concessionary. |
Originally Posted by shiznit
(Post 1203001)
Scope is more than RJ's.... Ask any NYC ER or LAX 73N pilot.
This contract recaptures control of flying that was previously allowed to be outsourced. Period. That is not concessionary. Next contract I'll be told we were able to get a 15% raise on day one. Unfortunately we had to give up our 15% DC! |
It is not 1994 any more. It is 2012 and the world is different. Those old rates no longer apply.
|
I read the LAX LEC letter, what exactly are you referring to in this letter. It appears that its just ALPA union propaganda. Its sad that we pay our hard earned money each month for a crap TA. Unbelievable, the NC is stroking each other with the success of a quick TA. Well, if you bend over fast enough, anyone is willing to give it to you fast and dirty. Delta NC, stop bending over on behalf of the entire DAL pilot group.
It may be bad timing... However, we need a changing of the guards for Delta pilots representation. I have read both the pros and cons of this TA. We should be in absolutely No rush to ratify this crap, send it back and do it right this time. Remember, the NC is working for us, we pay $$$ dues for this TA? Trust me, RA wants this contract inked early for a reason that will only benefit DAL MGT, Not DAL Pilots. The NC has more leverage than they want us to believe. We are no longer considered an asset at this company...Vote No. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:26 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands