alfaromeo

Just to get facts straight, Carl posted that profit sharing would be more than pay raises. The facts are that the maximum profit sharing could be reduced from the current formula is about $45 million a year. The July 1 pay raise by itself (4%) is an increase of about $80 million a year. Combine that with the Jan 1 raise and that is an increase of more than $250 million a year. There is no possible way that profit sharing could be more than the pay raises. End state pay increases are about $400 million per year. That is more than $45 million.

Superdad

It does not really matter what numbers you put up, this TA is not what the pilots asked for through the survey. That much is clear. The anger that most feel is that ALPA ignored our desires in order to get a deal quick, as desired by the company. No where in the survey do I remember being asked if I would cast aside my desires for a quick deal.

That is the real problem here

Boomer

The best sunset is in the current contract; here's why:

Right now, the 50s are reaching cycle limits. Comair is scrapping 50s because the cost of the high-time heavy check is more than the aircraft is worth. It's like doing a frame-up restoration on a 1982 Nissan Maxima. It may take another three or five years for SKW and 9E to catch up, but the 50s are getting old. Delta doesn't want them, they drink too much, and there is no 50-seat replacement jet on the drawing board anywhere.

In 8-10 years, the 50s will phase themselves out.

Contrast that to a fleet of EMB170s or NextGen 900s, built and delivered over the next two years. These aircraft will be flying at DCI for the next 20 years, and when they finally wear out they will be replaced with new. These jets will play a factor in the next 3 or 4 DALPA contract cycles.

So which is the better sunset?

• 300+ 50-seaters wearing out over the next 8-10 years with no replacement, or
• Parking 180 50-seaters in the next three years, and allowing 70 brand new EMB170/CRJ900 DC-9 replacement jets to take their place?

I agree there should be language re: GTF before this technology becomes a game-changer.

Carl Spackler

Here's what I actually posted about pay in a very lengthy post:

The facts are that profit sharing is by its nature indexed for both inflation and the destruction of the US dollar...pay raises are not. Further, this TA will undoubtedly result in stagnation or even backward movement while the airline refleets with smaller and lower paying aircraft with equivalent seat capacity. Combine these factors, and I stand by my statement that there's a strong possibility that with Delta's upcoming massive profits, the pay raises might well be a wash compared to accepting the totality of this TA.

And since you're a senior member of our MEC bureaucracy, I'll even show you how you can prove me wrong. Return this TA to the company with only 2 instructions for change...only these 2:

1. Keep our current cap of 255 over 50 seat RJ's, and
2. Keep our current percentage of profit sharing.

You just watch how fast the company says: "You know what, we're not in such a hurry now after all."

Carl

Check Essential

Bumping this post in the hope that alfaromeo will take a crack at answering.

Is the fleeting opportunity going to be revealed later? What was O'Malley talking about?

Carl Spackler

A must read post. Should be printed and posted on the ALPA boards.

Carl

Bill Lumberg

What about the 717s with today's scope? If we turned down the TA and still added the 717s, MD90s, and 737-900s, wouldn't we hit that magic number that allows 3 new 76 seaters for every 1 new mainline plane? I think we are 30 short right now. So, if we turn down the TA, and negotiate for 3 more years slowly for a 45% immediate pay raise, wouldn't those 70 76 seaters come anyway? I think they would, and we would still be fighting for a pay raise.

alfaromeo

OK, vote no. At least have your facts straight before you vote. It is not that ALPA ignored your desires. There were over 300 proposals/counter proposals passed in this deal. It is just the company reached their limit and it was time to give the MEC and the pilots a chance to weigh in. I am sure the second try will be much better, it sure worked out that way for the Airtran pilots with Southwest management. In general, airline managements usually cave in to pilots.

Average time in mediation now is 29 months. Start mediation in March 2013 and we will see how generous the company feels in October 2015. (Side note, our amendable date will be December 2015 so we will be in negotiations anyway) I can wait no problem. Until then, we won't have JV protection, tightened restriction on Alaska, hard fleet cap on DCI, no limit on large turboprops, no block hour ratio, etc. Oh and we will all be about $100,000 poorer. But it sounds like a great plan to me.

flyallnite

Thought about that too, but everything says that we will be capacity neutral going forward, and many of those 737-900's will replace the 757, 767, and A320's that are coming up on heavy checks. No mention has been made of future MD-88 retirements, but I could imagine that with more 717's and 76 seat RJ's, many of those could hit the desert too--- that last part is speculation though.

Bill Lumberg

Sure there is a way profit sharing could be above the raises. The only way would be our profit would exceed the $2.5 billion threshold by A LOT. If Delta made $5 billion profit in one year, then the pilots get 20% of the profit, and that could exceed one year's pay bump. It might be doubtful, but it is possible. That's the part many don't recognize here. The profit sharing could be reduced by 1/3 if the profit doesn't exceed $2.5 billion in one year. If it does go over that, then the 1/3 reduction doesn't happen, and the profit take is instead 20%, resulting in a higher profit sharing check than ever before. It would have to be a great year though.