No, you got 2,8,3,3. Come on Timbo that's basic accounting.

I believe the reduction in profit sharing is still applicable EVERY year, not just the first year. But you are right in that I did it twice in the first year, so it was more like 4,6.5, 1,1.

So I guess those MEC and NEG Com guys I spoke with prior to the vote were correct, due to profit sharing reductions, we never did see those 3% raises...

The profit sharing loss of 5% was offset by the 2% increase in pay. If you are going to count the 5% loss in profit sharing every year then you have to count the 2% increase in pay each year on the other side of the equation.

The actual increases are 4,6.5,3,3. Not nearly enough!

Denny

Denny, how do those numbers look when you subtract out 3% per year for inflation?

Funny how its "they(ALPA)" when its something deemed a loss and "WE" when its thought to be a win. No matter what, WE voted and OUR team of pilots said "YES". I don't get credit for voting no, MY team said yes.....so it's yes now for me too.

If we want better lets remember to educate our self proclaimed expert pilots on what a WIN is next time. ALPA can "spin" as get slung over and over, all they want. WE are highly educated and should be unaffected by trickery and vote based on our feelings on the facts. Win or lose we are all wearing the same jersey.
Sorry rant over.

Like I said earlier Alan, you can be the spokesman for the thesis that Delta pilots led the way for allowing 70 additional 76 seat RJ's to fly Delta passengers with non-Delta pilots...and we did that by so indicating on our surveys. Good luck with that.

My reps said differently. The pilots survey did not ask for more 76 seat RJ's. Thus it was not part of their direction to the NC. It was agreed to as guidance later when it became clear that this is what management wanted. It's what ALPA wanted as well. Why? Because of meet and confer in my opinion...because Delta pilots sure never asked for it.

Carl

Carls logic is sound. It may or may not be correct, but it is sound.

It usually is. That's why the DALPA aficionados hate him so much.

No, we really only got 4, 6.5, 3, and 3.

Maybe so. But Carl was saying that there's a chance that fuel could come down, thereby making the 50-seaters feasible again. Under C2012, that will not be an option.

Caps are almost worthless here because of our union's history of negotiating them away if management needs them gone.

Yes, DALPA negotiates away hard caps for more hard caps. The difference between us is that given this reality, you still value hard caps.

DALPA will either negotiate it away or purposely lose the grievance. Guaranteed.

Carl