![]() |
Originally Posted by DAL73n
(Post 1213472)
Yes, let's tell the whole truth. While DAL might not make $2 Billion next year they will make a BILLION Plus each year for the next few years (yes, that could turn around tomorrow - that's part of the judgement everyone needs to make). So, let's talk about the pay raises as 4/6.5/1/1 (remember, we gave up profit sharing to fund pay raises).
|
Originally Posted by dragon
(Post 1213348)
Derision is the best you can do to a post that was given some thought by the poster. Bill you are getting bad. There are quite a few on here that don't see the TA the same way you do. We haven't had that OMG moment of epiphany that you have and by the way, it's our vote!
I get it that you need the $$, but please don't try to sell this TA as positive. There are some positives in it, but far too many give backs or ups to stomach anything but a no. Please stop the demeaning posts. |
Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg
(Post 1213498)
I'm getting bad? Sorry I hurt your feelings. What you need is a little situational awareness to what is going on around you, the industry, and the worldwide economy. But if you think you are worth a 40% raise DOS, then go for it.
|
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1213381)
Posting that there will be 300 furloughs as a result of the TA is quite simply a lie and the poster knows that.
I guess I made the jump to 300 furloughs all on my own. For that I apologise to Bill, Sailing, and the rest of you. |
Originally Posted by ripn6
(Post 1213350)
It is very simple. This TA will breathe life into a dying DCI model. It may reduce the total number of RJ's now, but DALPA has proved that a hard cap limit is for sale. We will be back at the table in only 2 1/2 years, and the company will be looking for more large RJ's. I'm okay with the pay. Scope was my number one concern going into this negotiation.
I've heard your argument that this TA tightens scope, and understand what your saying, so you don't need to say it again. The "sale" for the hard cap removal was funded with better overall scope, not cash. That's what you aren't understanding here. There were other parts to this that made it a good deal. Fewer RJs total, sooner. Caps on large turboprops. 717s that can come sooner to fill the capacity void as larger RJs fill in for smaller ones leaving. Then the ratio that favors mainline by a lot more. The pay raise is good for a 3 year duration also, it beat the current 4 year contract that we are still under. Some people think they deserve restoration, or know there must be something they can leverage. I just can't see it, even the RJ mx cost. There may be other "plans" out there that none of us know about. But I do know one thing, the TA isn't that bad at all. |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1213499)
Says the guy who believes that all 88 717s have to be delivered before any additional 76 seaters can be added...
Plenty of bad info and conspiracy theories out there. That's too bad. |
The cap on large turboprops is huge. The company could easily go with a plan B that involves the Q400 and have the same leverage to dump the leases on the CRJ50's that a 900 purchase would entail. In fact it would not surprise me a bit if that is the companies plan B. It makes sense and the aircraft is so good it might just be better then plan A.
|
Originally Posted by DLpilot
(Post 1213449)
Works both ways. You do not know either what will happen if we turn this down. Plenty of assumptions that a rejection will automatically lead to a long 3 plus year battle. Only RA knows what he will do. Do you honestly think he would show negotiatiors what his plan b is? They are only guessing that it will be worst case.
Do you honestly think our negotiators, MEC, vast support staff, subject matter experts, lawyers, consultants, and everyone else haven't thought of this? They have knowledge, resources, and skills that you and I do not have. Yes, I am a pilot, but I don't know everything about everything. The only reason to vote NO is if you are convinced there is some sort of corruption or fraud going on here, like we had with the Bill Brown admin in 1996. We've elected our reps to do a job. They've done it. With integrity from everything I can see. |
Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg
(Post 1213498)
I'm getting bad? Sorry I hurt your feelings. What you need is a little situational awareness to what is going on around you, the industry, and the worldwide economy. But if you think you are worth a 40% raise DOS, then go for it.
I don't want 40% DOS, where did you get that drivel, the same place you get the rest of the crap you post? I want the company to be successful and recognize the pilots' worth. Concessionary contracts are signed when the company is losing money not making profits. You are so set on this paltry rase you can taste it and let's admit it, you spent the $$ already. |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1213530)
The cap on large turboprops is huge. The company could easily go with a plan B that involves the Q400 and have the same leverage to dump the leases on the CRJ50's that a 900 purchase would entail. In fact it would not surprise me a bit if that is the companies plan B. It makes sense and the aircraft is so good it might just be better then plan A.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:57 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands