Details on Delta TA
09-03-2014 | 10:39 AM
#1361
Line Holder
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 637
Likes: 15
From: Stretch DC-9 Gear Slinger
Both, if we still had 800 copilots I would fly alot less. If we didn't have contract 2012 I would not have flown over guarantee the last three months
09-03-2014 | 11:02 AM
#1362
Moderator
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
No I did not. Which only strengthens my argument that until you can provide some, your statement is nothing more than your opinion. I'm willing to accept that you've spoken with other Delta pilots that share your view, but that doesn't make your view the majority.
Still conjecture on your part. You're assuming that is the case.
Well, 63% of the pilot group felt those numbers were acceptable. If they didn't feel that way, then they should have voted NO.
Can you honestly tell me that any significant number of Delta pilots you ran across at the time (other than those few on the inside in the DALPA echo chamber) indicated to you that something anywhere near as low as 4833 would be acceptable? Cause I can guarantee you I never ran across a single line pilot at the time that had expectations anywhere near that low.
09-03-2014 | 11:20 AM
#1363
At home on the maddog!
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,874
Likes: 0
From: Retired (mandatory age 65)
No I did not. Which only strengthens my argument that until you can provide some, your statement is nothing more than your opinion. I'm willing to accept that you've spoken with other Delta pilots that share your view, but that doesn't make your view the majority.
Still conjecture on your part. You're assuming that is the case.
Well, 63% of the pilot group felt those numbers were acceptable. If they didn't feel that way, then they should have voted NO.
Still conjecture on your part. You're assuming that is the case.
Well, 63% of the pilot group felt those numbers were acceptable. If they didn't feel that way, then they should have voted NO.
09-03-2014 | 11:41 AM
#1365
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,039
Likes: 0
From: 7ERB
Johnso, you're hiding behind the lack of data. You and I both know the minimum pay number on that survey was way higher than 4833. There were a host of different reasons why pilots voted in favor of that agreement. Quite a few said they voted for it, not because the pay was adequate, but because they saw it as the lessor of two evils. If everyone who thought 4833 was way too low had voted no, I submit that the number in favor would have been way lower than 62%. There's a reason why marketing and scare tactics work.
Majority of the Pilot group probably requested a 25-30% pay raise. My ASSumption realized through talking with pilots.
My hunch is that RA somehow knew this. It is a HUNCH only.
Most deals, in negotiation, will not fall through if the percentages are with in a realistic window. 19% more Money in the pocket now (C2012) is better than 3 years of haggling wishing for 25-30%.
I, on the other hand, would have loved the haggle. THe only thing is, we do not have the right hagglers.
TEN
09-03-2014 | 11:53 AM
#1366
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,877
Likes: 193
Profit sharing was not reduced 33%. I am amazed there are still pilots who don't know what is in a 2 year old agreement. Only the portion under 2.5 billion had that reduction. The actual reduction this year will probably be around 10%.
09-03-2014 | 11:57 AM
#1367
Moderator
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
Johnso, you're hiding behind the lack of data. You and I both know the minimum pay number on that survey was way higher than 4833. There were a host of different reasons why pilots voted in favor of that agreement. Quite a few said they voted for it, not because the pay was adequate, but because they saw it as the lessor of two evils. If everyone who thought 4833 was way too low had voted no, I submit that the number in favor would have been way lower than 62%. There's a reason why marketing and scare tactics work.
09-03-2014 | 11:58 AM
#1368
Straight QOL, homie
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,202
Likes: 1
From: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
09-03-2014 | 12:05 PM
#1369
Moderator
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
09-03-2014 | 12:14 PM
#1370
At home on the maddog!
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,874
Likes: 0
From: Retired (mandatory age 65)
Oh that's just great. You're fine with accepting bankruptcy as the new baseline and sustaining a 34% pay cut for 10 years and long after the financial crisis for our company has been over. At least you're in good company in the DALPA echo chamber.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
