gettinbumped

You beat me to it

rickhouck300

Been reading these posts and responses for a few days now, tryng to make up my mind about this TA, and I have to say I don't have much respect for the very negative responses. Opinions are great, but hey if you don't like the job or think you can make more money or have a better quality of life somewhere else, go for it. I have friends at American, United, and US air, and they have all told me they would jump at this TA. I understand it is not as good as I (and pretty much all of us) had hoped, but it has many positives, and the little productivity items we gave are not that substantial in my opinion. The Scope clause to me is a positive given the block hour ratios, caps on RJ's, the furlough clauses, and the decrease in total DCI flying, even considering the 70 more large RJ's we gave up to get the gains. A win/win if you ask me. The big issues for me are 1.) Do I really trust ALPA, and if we send it back with a no vote, what are the same negotiators going to be able to achieve, and 2.) Will the company go to "Plan B, or will they bump things up a little to try to get another quick TA...who has the crystal ball?? Who do we believe? I have read every letter from all the MEC voters, I see both sides of the issues, and I keep coming back to the fact that it is a 3 year contract, and I really think we will not do this well if it goes to the NMB. Is the company willing to pay us more to get a quick deal? That is a big question mark

More Bacon

Like what?

More Bacon

The first post of this thread does a great job highlighting our leverage, and makes a very strong case that the company does, in fact, need a quick deal.

Underestimating our bargaining position and failing to capitalize on every ounce of leverage is every bit as detrimental to our careers as overestimating our position.

The company will squeeze us for every dime they can. They can only do it if we allow them to. We must be prepared do the same on these rare instances where we are holding some good cards.

acl65pilot

After Los 29 I'm getting a lot more sc's. Six last month and over 50hrs of block. Didn't do anything the first week so that was in the last three. We will all see more sc's going forward. More trips getting broken up to keep pilots available.

DAL 88 Driver

Sure doesn't sound like it.

tsquare

My bet is that management's reasons for desiring a quick deal will be overcome by events. They will be in absolutely no hurry to offer us any deal approaching this TA for a long time because they will have us under a BK contract for as long as necessary... And by the time we are offered another deal, the protections offered herein will be gone, and the pay will be eroded by inflation. Sounds like a win/win to ... Let's just say no..

tsquare

Can you guarantee 100 cents on the dollar value lost in a retro check?

DAL73n

Shiz,

How come you and the other Yes voters seem to omit the negatives (concessions) of this TA:

1. We have a higher ALV (+2 hours) that will force approximately 6 extra days (minimum) per year that offsets any increases in vacation.
2. While any increase is good the increase in per diem (5%) doesn't even match our increases in costs (while we travel - food, etc) over the last 7 years since BK.
3. Reserves do get an increase in base pay BUT does not match the extra work they will be doing with ALV + 15, reserve guarantee +2, extra short call. Don't think the company hasn't modeled (remember the reason it takes more than a day to post schedules is because they make more than one run to make sure it is optimized).
4. We are still working for free (and all the money the company has saved with distributed training) by only getting 1 minute of pay for every 2 minutes of running time - can't figure how this one got through in the first place.
5. 4-8.5-3-3 loses 2-2.5% due to lost profit share and 3-4%/year (minimum - I and most others believe "real inflation" is much higher due to the way the government calculates inflation. So now, our 18.5% (19.7% compounded however you want to look at it) is only 3-4% after inflation (Max) which is no real increase in our standard of living.
6. While DCI is decreasing a little faster than it would have naturally, we are solving managements problems (our only real leverage - why do you think this deal got done so fast) and letting them exchange OLD 50 seaters (a little early) for brand new 76 seaters (likely with WiFi, IFE, and First class - thereby placating our HVCs) that will be around for 30 years (RA has said he will only buy new A/C with a 30 year life span). There is nothing that guarantees that this will increase main line jobs (SD's recent statements notwithstanding). I believe that this will allow DAL to exercise capacity discipline with DCI and reduce DCI block hours to comply with the new ratios.
7. Everyone seems to be missing that the new A/C will at first replace the DC-9s (the first 21 717s) which means no new pilots through at least 2014. In addition, the 737-900s have already been stated to be replacement A/C for domestic 757s/767s which will then be more lower paying jobs.

I'm sure I've missed a few more, just wanted to make sure we get some of the cons out there which DALPA is sure to leave out of all the road shows and NNPs.

DAL73n

Rick,

Good to see you posting. Don't let some of the rude negative posters allow you to ignore some of the good information that is being put out about the cons in this contract (and there are some serious cons - this is not a slam dunk positive contract and the voting will be close).