I’m glad to see this is getting such a resounding reception! It may be an “unrealistic opener,” but I think you guys have every right to be insulted. Personally, I’m insulted that this is being presented by your management as “competitive with Delta,” and other such terms. There are some key differences in what they are proposing, and what Delta has (and lets not forget that DAL is STILL working under a bankruptcy contract. An improved bankruptcy contract, but a bankruptcy contract, notwithstanding.)

Pay: Delta + $1? Well, sorta. On the CA side, it looks like the 77/74 guys get parody, but it degrades from there. The 76 rates are actually a blend of the DAL 76-400 and smaller 76/75 rates, so the 76-400 guys get hosed there. The 75 guys are getting hosed by a few bucks, since DAL 75 drivers are paid the same as 76 drivers. The 73 CA really take a hit, as what UAL management proposes are actually the DAL 319/320 rates, which are about $6 lower than the 73 rates. On the FO side – it goes without saying that new hires are taking it in the shorts. Beyond that, the same discrepancies exist as on the CA side, But there is an even wider gap in the junior ranks. Year 2 and 3 are about $20 lower than DAL 320 drivers, narrowing to $10-15 in years 4-6, where the gap finally closes to about $2.

Scope: There are some important provisions to DAL’s scope that UAL management doesn’t seem to bring up. There are 2 limits on “large RJ’s” (defined as those having more than 50 seats. Funny, UAL doesn’t mention what the lower limit of “large” is. One would assume anything over 50 seats is “large”, but they don’t mention….) First, there is a limit of 255 total airframes over 50 seats. This Is a HARD CAP, and DOES NOT CHANGE with the size of the mainline fleet. Second, the limit on 71+ seat aircraft is 153, and IS tied to the mainline fleet. (increase is 3 RJ’s per 1 mainline, I believe.) However – if they hit the cap of 255 large RJ’s, they can’t add another 76 jet without pulling out one smaller than 71 seats, no matter how big the mainline fleet gets. (And, again DAL is “bankruptcy scope”)

By my count, UAL has 152 “large” RJ’s currently out and flying – so this proposal leaves room for about 100 more (assuming, of course, that “large” means over 50 seats…)

 

That's a ridiculous assertion. Management called the CAL 08 opener the same thing - "Delta + 1". In both cases (08 and the current POS) it's referring primarily to compensation and even that is full of holes (737 pay rates for example). It's not offering the same or better work rules. It's certainly not offering the same or better scope and it definitely is not offering furlough longevity. Don't blame ALPA for "taking away" something that management hasn't offered.

 

So the company's ploy of negotiating in public has worked on at least one. Any old dudes wanna chime in about ALPA taking away their $250,000 buyout?

 

OK here goes:

$250,000. isn't enough!

First after taxes the amount will be almost half that amount unless it is put into some financial vehicle.

Second why would one who has 1000+ hours sick list and already makes 100K + annually take that buy out in their last two years? They can work very little and still contribute to their 401K and receive full medical benefits.

Now if the amount equaled about $500K after taxes or some payable over a year or two then you might have something.

A one time $250K is not enough!

 

By financial vehicle, do you mean Lexus, Mercedes, or BMW? I've already heard of the poor, lost pension, over 60 Captains discussing what they'd buy with their retro check. That's weird, I'm sure they said they were staying to SAVE for retirement??

PIPE

 

Does age 57 qualify as an "old guy?"

I wouldn't give in on 250 regional jets if somebody offered me a $10 million buyout. Nor wouldn't I take a pay raise at the expense of vacation, or of starting my flight pay at aircraft movement instead of break release.

If there is anybody out there lamenting the loss of this buyout, send him for a fitness for duty evaluation.

BTW, if you read the wording, this "incentive" was damn near unachievable anyway, as it was based on getting a JCBA and a SLI prior to achievement of a single operating certificate. The company knew that when it wrote it. It had no intention of playing a single one quarter-million buyout, just stirring the pot instead.

 

You broke the code.

 

Funny when I read this and no I am not a over 60 captain but I do fly with many over age 60 guys that are first officers that have been hosed along the way such as ex eastern, followed by esop and so on so I don't think this site should lump them all together.

 

Just like the company can tell the furloughed guys, "Well it was ALPA that caused your furloughs because the union wouldn't agree to scope language modifications for our Joint Venture in exchange for not furloughing pilots."

Everyone can see through their games and dishonesty. Management is the only one to blame in all this. If they would spend more time managing the airline instead of managing expectations, we'd be properly staffed, have a contract in place, plus all the other operational issues that have come up in the past couple of months would be addressed as well.

 

That's good, because was starting to think a few didn't see the resemblance........