Productivity Increase with the TA
 

Guys from the NN on work-rules:

"These changes will likely result in a contractual staffing reduction of approximately 300 pilots. However, the Pilot Retirement Medical Account Program (See Negotiators’ Notepad 12-07) and other changes to the PWA such as the increases to the staffing formula and to vacation and CQ training pay are expected to more than compensate for
this reduction."


While this is written to look neutral it is a big negative in my opinion. If nothing changed we would all advance accordingly when these "300" guys retired. It may not have be for 2 or three years but the advancement would then be a permanent improvement.

Now it will take approximately 300 retirees to just break even and we will "lose" the same advancement when those 300 guys would have retired in two or three years.

Am I making a mistake in my logic, or is trading productivity for an early retirement program a big loser in the long term? :confused:


Scoop

I was actually pondering over this exact same thing earlier today... and came to the identical conclusion.

It's a very simple deduction and only takes one step back to see the big picture.

Yup. I hope people are actually paying attention to these NN messages and reading them critically. I really wish our union was in the business of informing us. Not pushing a product on us. True representatives, not salespeople.

Many on here need to go to a roadshow. The airline is only perfectly staffed for two months of the year, July and August, and then we are over staffed for the rest of the year. There were plenty of lines given this past spring and winter worth less than 70 hours. That is unproductive for the company, and for line holders. The TA won't cause every reserve to fly 99 hours a month, but it will give more certainty about getting a line to bottom line holders.

How about the part about getting rid of trip parking? In the TA, you'd have to send the parked trip back through PCS first, allowing everyone a chance at the trip. That is another gain in this TA some overlook.

Bottom line, and its already been said, the proposed reserve rules permanently reduce pilot head count by 300 or more throughout all categories forever (this is not a one time deal folks....it negatively affects the number of pilots at Delta as long as it is in effect which could be well beyond when each of us retire). Its a boon for the company and a bust for the pilots. Just say NO.

Helping fill the companies reserve productivity want list is not part of a restorative contract. Many guys want the ability to bid reserve and fly less in the winter. Its an option. Options are good things for pilots. Let's not give more options away please.

Do they also need to go to a roadshow to learn that they ought to solve all the company's problems while being minimally compensated for it?

Bottom line is we're giving up QOL PERMANENTLY, for early retirements, which is short term. Stop helping to run the company. Our job is to fly jets from point A to point B. Next they're gonna want us to pay for crew meals as well.

Why not, with DALPA we are willing to help the company with their uneconomical, worn out RJ problem. We can help them cut reserve staffing to the bone throughout the whole year.

I just want to know when we can give up more work rules and allow more large RJ's to help finance a widebody replacement program. I am guessing we wont have to wait long....maybe three years until the next contract to help them with that. Something to look forward too anyway. Constructive engagement is great once you get over the part where you are getting short changed at every corner.

Unless I'm mistaken theses are called negotiations not demands. The company is always going to want increased productivity and they bought it with the increased pay for reserves. The company is cranking up hiring in the first quarter of next year to man the 717's and replace the early outs to try and even out the coming mass exodous unless the TA doesn't pass, then unless you're a fly on Richards wall it's all speculation beyond that.

So, you want 65 hour lines every month except July and August, forever? I don't. Many guys also wanted 75 hours of pay on reserve, but can't believe it if that means they might actually fly 75 hours! We all want total restoration, except some want all of it now, when every other legacy hasn't helped at all. But, we can do it for them! (again). It's time to be realistic and go for realistic gains that do add up with shorter contracts.

Solving problems while gaining 20% pay raises and improvements in work rules, sick leave, and scope tightening, while doing it all within the time normal negotiations would have taken? I guess, yes then.

+++++++++1

realistic gains are 4/8.5/3/3? After losing your pension, years of equipment advancement due to age 65, and half of Delta being outsourced, you're ok with that? Oh, and that didn't even account for it... you had to give up profit sharing for that in a period where DL will be making billions.

Let's play 52 pick up!

You are correct as far as the early retirement program. It is not a offset to work rule changes and should not be sold as such. Those pilots would all likely as you point out be gone in the next two to three years. The changes to how training and vacation are handled are however real and will generate jobs to help offset the 300 jobs that could be lost to the other items. It looks to me like the net job loss is around 200 pilots not counting the increased value of vacation and training just the different application of it relative to the current method. The 300 number by the way is considered to be a worst case number. Its really hard to quantify such a number. As a example how many pilots today when they have say 60 hours of flying choose to yellow high and fly past the ALV? That has the same effect as ALV plus 15.

In summary
ALV 15- lost jobs
30 day months-lost jobs
84 hours-lost jobs
Vacation applied to reserve hours- slight gain in jobs
training applied to reserve hours- slight gain in jobs
5 to 6 extra x days per year- slight gain in jobs
Extra vacation and training pay-neutral to very slight gain
full when projection reaches reserve guarantee- slight gain in jobs

I do not think the staffing formula will protect any jobs as Dalpa believes. The reason for that is historically the company has never been able to staff right at the manning formula. We are staffed well above it today. It will create contractual jobs but will not create actual jobs which is what we all really care about.

If you believe half of Delta is outsourced then you must love the TA on scope. Currently half our domestic departures are outsourced however only about 14 percent of the passengers due to the small size of DCI aircraft and total seats. This TA reduces the amount of DCI flights so that we can get back some of those those jobs. If you want to use total departures as your metric for outsourcing then this TA is a big success. I prefer the passengers carried as my metric and while the TA reduces that count it is not nearly as much as departures.

The TA has some very good numbers and caps in it. I think the angst all boils down to whether you think the ALPA lawyers will actually defend it or of they'll behave like they did in the past "Aw, shucks, looks like y'all fooled us again"

Sailing, ALPA's numbers are 300 on the FAQ part of the forum, or 340 from the C1 Chairman. Those are their numbers, and many have come up with the same conclusion.

The PIRP is a one time take, the work rule changes last.

Plus the retirements were going to happen anyway in the near future.

Let's look at the above:

20% raise. Numbers compute and that is improvement. We can argue over whether it is enough of an improvement, but....

Improvements in work rules. If work rules change allowing the the company to man with 300 fewer pilots, then the work rule changes are concessionary. If management has too many pilots sitting around on reserve, that sounds like a good time to bid reserve, or bid down to a where you can hold a line.

Improvement in sick leave. Eliminating the 75% pay provision is an improvement, as is the extra hours for pilots with more than 20 years. But the monitoring program will not be eliminated as advertised by the MEC, but in fact is now part of the contract. IMO, this section is now worse than present book.

Tightening scope. With the SEA and Q400 carve out, I'm not not convinced. Allowing more 76 seat jets, while reducing the 50 seat??? I'm just not there. JV improvements? Great.

Doing all this early? I'm all for it if it meets the needs of the pilot group. Not meeting mine.

The question comes down to the quids, and leverage used or missed.

I agree, the collective will of this group will prevail and all of us should accept that in the end. I know I will no matter if it fails or passes. I just hope it fails or passes by more than a few basis points. If that happens, it sets us up for ugliness until we have a merger where we can all unite.

Vacation per pilot at DAL is roughly 4 weeks/year. Increase it by :15.
10,500 x :15 x 28 = 73,500 hours

DAL Pilots spend approx 6 days per year at training. Increase it by :30.
10,500 x :30 x 6 = 31,500 hours

73,500 + 31,500 = 105,000 / 12 months = 8,750 hours

8750 / 87* hours = 100.57 = 101 MORE pilots needed for just those 2 provisions.

72 hours is the projected gain from the staffing formula changes.

So between staffing formula and vaca/trng pay increases we have wiped out well over half of what they are claiming in savings from the 300 number....

Don't forget that you are still full once you hit ALV, and no longer will all reserves be forced to fly up to the lineholder ALV... A reserve will be full at their individually calculated ALV..... Combine that with the increased values for VAC/TRNG and a reserve ALV will often be lower than the normal ALV for 5-6 months per year.


*The 87 is the official ALPA distributed number... using a lower divisor of 75:00 means it would be 117 pilots needed.


This is an extremely complex set of changes and getting hung up on a small piece of it is not good. It still might not stack up to what we want as a group, but make sure we evaluate it in its entirety and in light of the reality of our peers and the RLA/NMB. Still can't be sure I'm voting yes, its a daily swing for me too.

At least we can agree on the bolded part above. Historically, complex formulas, ratios and such have not panned out well for this pilot group.

When things don't work out all we get is "sorry" (if that). We should not be offering ALV + 15, more permanent large RJ's replacing small inefficient RJ's that will go away on their own, or any other work rule concessions to fix managements problems.

What is being offered is not even close to what this contract should be and the wrong direction in my opinion. There is no going back if it is passed. The damage, stagnation, and frustration will be permanent.

Your calculation of 100-117 additional pilots is correct if every pilot reduced his monthly block hours by the respective increase in time paid per day. I doubt that will be the behavior. Many (most?) pilots will still fly as much as they can around vacation/training for the additional $$.

So I'm clear, the increase in training and vacation days is good. Not good enough for me, but the increase is good.

Remember that VAC/TRNG is pay and credit, so pilots are still restricted to ALV +15, they will hit that ceiling that much sooner and maybe not have enough room to pick up a WS with the higher values... Yes, I know the swap board is an option to evade that, but I haven't seen nearly the trip options on the the swap board that you see in open time.

Shiz,

I found where Training is pay and credit. Can't find where vacation is pay and credit - previously was pay, no credit - this is important - just reread it and can't find the statement pay and credit for vacation.

Let's reject this TA so we don't have to hire any 717 F/O's or create new Capt. positions. We also don't need a pay raise any time soon. This is a 1 time deal, when it's rejected it's gone forever. The company will spend the $400 mil on keeping and expanding the existing RJ fleet. Look at the big picture and quit micro managing this TA. Never mind, I might as well be posting this on "real no sh!!t stories of martians"

Big deal. Its gone forever, lol. Who cares, let the other airlines kick our butts. Maybe RA/mngmt will value us better next time and offer us a fair deal.

Finis, please.

TEN

You also have to consider that we are getting a 4% raise 6 month before the amendable date and almost a 13% total raise at the amendable date. Best case in a full blow section 6 is maybe getting a raise 18 months after the amendable date. Just look at history. By the time a normal section 6 plays out we will be exchanging openers for our next TA. I know I know I know but this deal is not the end of the world people. If you think the risk/reward is a slam dunk in our favor than you are fooling yourself. I'm on the fence but starting to lean towards yes.

WRT your numbers--have you factored in the near certainly of skyrocketing inflation?

Because you can rest assured RA has factored it into his numbers.

I posted this before the TA was announced was how would Wall Street view this contract. Well, so far the vote is Stock Market (DJIA) in the two weeks since the TA was announced - DOWN 3.0%. DAL stock - UP 7.2%. Food for thought.

Do you think it might just have something to do with the price of oil? Have you looked at the other airline stocks? Compared to most we are up less! Is that because of the contract?

Don't we have a high opinion of ourselves. :O

I agree with your premise but think there's a more accurate comparison to use, and that would be the airline industry rather than the whole market. The TA was publicly announced 5/15/2012.

On 5/14/2012 DAL stock closed at $11.43 per share. The XAL airline index closed at $38.21. On 6/1 DAL stock closed at $11.51 per share, a gain of 8 cents or +0.7% over the 5/14 close. The XAL index closed at $37.35, a loss of $0.86 or -2.3%. With a few exceptions Delta has been trading above XAL since the end of March.

My cars and toys are paid for and I don't have kids and I own 3 homes that I bought dirt cheap and I'm young so I don't really pay attention to, or understand the negative effects of inflation. My $$$ in my wallet still buys the same stuff it did 10 years ago. Perhaps you could educate me how rising inflation will impact my situation.

I guess you haven't bought a lot of gas in the past ten years...:confused:

If gas makes or breaks your monthly budget then there are other options for you. If you need a 40% raise to make up for "gas" then god help ya. :cool:

You're missing the point. Reserves only get up to a maximum of 13 days off a month.

When I flew the 88/90, I would bid 3 high time 4 day trips. 12 productive days work at work and I would easily make guarantee.

But now, as a reserve pilot, I could end up flying the same amount of hours while also sitting 6 short calls on the remaining days !!!

So it just isn't "gosh, I have to fly 75 hours this month?"

Simple, oil is down. And we are cutting capacity which means we should be profitable.

Perhaps the most ignorant comment I've ever seen posted on here.

If the post is that ignorant then please educate me on how I need more than a 20% raise over the next 2 years to beat "inflation" While you are at it also educate us how full blown section will make us better off. I wont hold my breath waiting for an educated response as all I expect is a one liner. :cool:

I didn't say anything about my budget, or my level of financial need. I'm doing fine, thank you.

You stated that your money buys the same thing it did ten years ago, and I gave one example of why I think you are wrong. Nothing personal.

Nothing personal taken. I just don't buy the "inflation" crap. Everyone talks inflation but no one ever expands or explains it. I mean I kind of get it but it's all about living within ones means. My friends who gripe most about gas drive gas guzzlers and go through 5 tanks a month. I'm sorry if I don't have much sympathy for them. Everyone mentions "gas" prices but other than that I don't hear much on the topic of inflation. At current book Delta pilots earn way more than 90% of Americans. What we are dealing with is an entitlement issue, not an "inflation" issue.