![]() |
Jack:
Its Delta Air Lines. Can't believe they hired you without spelling the airline correctly! :D |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 1202743)
Jack:
Its Delta Air Lines. Can't believe they hired you without spelling the airline correctly! :D |
Originally Posted by JungleBus
(Post 1202724)
Fascinating response. In regard to the bolded above, would you mind telling me why? What's so special about the names on the Delta Air Lines seniority list that you care so deeply about their needs and opinions, and not mine?
They fly Delta passengers. So do I. They fly an airplane that says Delta on the side. So do I. They fly across the breadth of the Delta domestic system. So do I. They are experienced, conscientious pilots. So am I. They care about the future of Delta Air Lines. So do I. They want mainline to grow. So do I. What's in this TA will deeply affect their careers. Mine too. I've mentioned it before, that I'm senior on the CPS list and have flow rights at Delta, will be there soon after they start hiring, and therefore have a vested interest in the next contract. But I'm fairly certain that doesn't particularly matter to you. The thing is, I'm not completely convinced that the simple matter of my presence on the seniority list would suddenly make you care about what I think or how this contract will affect me, despite your protestations above. If a pilot doesn't care how their contract affects their industry, their profession, the pilots who fly their passengers, or the future pilots of Delta - why would they suddenly care about what, say, a junior DC9B on reserve thinks simply because they wear a double-breasted blazer? I call mulligans. On the other hand, maybe I'm overreacting and you don't particularly care about whether I'm DCI or Delta, just didn't like my response to your ridiculous assertion that giving away 76 seaters is setting us up to recapture them, and chose my place of employment as an alternate means to avoid the issue. Pattern bargaining means we try to get the best deal possible for us; when it's your turn to negotiate, you get to use our contract as justification for a better contract. It doesn't mean that we should negotiate from your wish list, whether you work for Compass, UCAL, or Mesa. |
I will withhold my final judgement until I read the section 1 language as it's written. But for now, based on the negotiator notepads, passing this TA will give the company the equivalent of TWO Compass airlines in exchange for B717s (yesterdays technology tomorrow) and parking inefficient 50 seaters. All this based on the assumption of mainline growth, which I believe will happen right up to the additional large RJ cap. Then all those "beyond control of the company" issues will pop up and DAL will be forced to park those older inefficient mainline jets. At that point the block hour ratio kicks in. I'm willing to bet that in a contraction, all that block hour reduction will come out of the remaining 50 seat fleet and the large RJ's will steam ahead full tilt, flying more and more of our mainline routes in full compliance with the TA. In addition, the work rule changes and early retirement will ensure limited mainline hiring even with 88 mainline airframes added.
The bottom line for me is can I spend my remaining few years in this business looking my F/O straight in the eye and say I voted yes to selling his (and my) seat to another airline. I'm not willing to do that. The solution is so simple (and frankly...why did our NC not hold out for this). We fly the larger gauge RJs, the company has no cap and can still renegotiate their leases and get rid of the 50 seat albatross that they created. What's the stumbling block...the company loses it's B scale. Should we vote this down...I hardly think the company will sit on it's hands and do nothing for the next 3 years despite our concessionary contract. They wanted something badly and we might give it to them for essentially nothing. |
Originally Posted by qball
(Post 1202817)
I will withhold my final judgement until I read the section 1 language as it's written. But for now, based on the negotiator notepads, passing this TA will give the company the equivalent of TWO Compass airlines in exchange for B717s (yesterdays technology tomorrow) and parking inefficient 50 seaters. All this based on the assumption of mainline growth, which I believe will happen right up to the additional large RJ cap. Then all those "beyond control of the company" issues will pop up and DAL will be forced to park those older inefficient mainline jets. At that point the block hour ratio kicks in. I'm willing to bet that in a contraction, all that block hour reduction will come out of the remaining 50 seat fleet and the large RJ's will steam ahead full tilt, flying more and more of our mainline routes in full compliance with the TA. In addition, the work rule changes and early retirement will ensure limited mainline hiring even with 88 mainline airframes added.
The bottom line for me is can I spend my remaining few years in this business looking my F/O straight in the eye and say I voted yes to selling his (and my) seat to another airline. I'm not willing to do that. The solution is so simple (and frankly...why did our NC not hold out for this). We fly the larger gauge RJs, the company has no cap and can still renegotiate their leases and get rid of the 50 seat albatross that they created. What's the stumbling block...the company loses it's B scale. Should we vote this down...I hardly think the company will sit on it's hands and do nothing for the next 3 years despite our concessionary contract. They wanted something badly and we might give it to them for essentially nothing. |
Originally Posted by CVG767A
(Post 1202751)
I've gotta say, I don't care about the contract needs and wants, or the career aspirations of non-Delta pilots either. I hope we use our negotiating capital to improve our quality of life, and you can do the same at your airline. It sounds like you'll be coming over to Delta soon. When that happens, I'm in your corner. Until then, your wish list is irrelevant to me.
Pattern bargaining means we try to get the best deal possible for us; when it's your turn to negotiate, you get to use our contract as justification for a better contract. It doesn't mean that we should negotiate from your wish list, whether you work for Compass, UCAL, or Mesa. |
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 1202957)
While I can't stand the guy's name (jungle bus....:mad:) he makes some very good points. While its semi-fair to say we only care about DL pilots on the list today, we can't entirely hide behind that. If we could, then we should have no problem with a B scale for all future new hires, right? I mean who cares about them, they are not here. Junglebus (omg I so hate that name) will be at DL so its fair for him to interject his opinion on this. More importantly than that though, he's right about what he's saying. If its really a matter of parliamentary procedure, then I officially yield him the balance of my time.
|
Originally Posted by JungleBus
(Post 1202976)
Heh, I'm really sorry you hate the screenname so badly...I think we hashed it out in another thread, but it wasn't meant as any sort of slam on the airbus or bus pilots or anything mainline, more of a lighthearted reference to the embraer's brazilian origins. How bout once I get to DAL I pick a new screenname? "EmbraerKiller" perhaps? :D
|
Originally Posted by Jack Bauer
(Post 1202672)
You care about yourself and your small pay bump. Not the pilots of Delta Airlines. Yes, you do have a conflict of interest. You support a rogue union leadership that said it would put together a contract that represented the desires of thousands of line pilots as reflected in the contract survey. That promise is not being followed. We are being sold on something "big brother" thinks is best based upon THEIR/YOUR own opinions, desires and interests.
What is happening right now and what DALPA is doing is completely bogus. The selling to this pilot group of something other than what they asked for is unacceptable and the reason DALPA has become so reviled this past decade. Everybody, just vote NO. Let's do this right and not regret a rushed decision (that will likely continue the stagnation we have endured for too long already) after frenzied selling by your rogue union leadership. |
Originally Posted by bluejuice71
(Post 1203339)
Dude, I think you've gone rogue. You've been watching too much 24. Not everything is a conspiracy and management is not always out to get us. It's just business. Management figured out how much they were willing to give us to get this deal done and for us to get the 717's and make it worthwhile. That's it. And just because the pilots asked for more never meant we were going to get it.
Again, I have no problem with management doing everything they can to win this negotiation. That is what they are paid to do....keep costs down and maintain leverage, never allowing any one group to increase their bargaining power. Where I have a huge problem is the union that told us to take the time to fill out a survey that would be used as the blueprint for this contract, not following their own rules, keeping the membership in the dark (they still wont release the survey....I will let you guess why) and now using misleading examples to sell us on what THEY think we should really want. We were told if we could not obtain what the survey reflected we would not rush the process. We would enter into traditional negotiations. Virtually everything they said they would do they have strayed from and imposed their own will over the will of the pilots. That is not representation. I get it. You are OK with that. You get a few bucks more in your pocket and are willing to take your chances with further erosion of some key work rules and large RJ outsourcing that will stay with us forever for a handful of used 717's. That is your choice. My prediction; If enough people buy off on what the DALPA marketing group is selling only to be left with a few sweaty dollars in their pocket and unfulfilled promises, this pilot group will finally get what it needs, albeit a little too late to prevent the damage of this contract we will have to live with for a very long time. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:50 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands