Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
06-01-2012, 07:59 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Restricting the footprint is critical, and we have no protections for that right now.
Once we have put a fence around the DCI pen, we can shrink the pen as the numbers naturally dwindle (if we choose to, and I think most on here do).
I see it as step one in a multi-step game. Shorter contracts allow us to take another "step" in shorter time frames. Waiting for 7 years in between negotiations doesn't help us achieve improvements nearly as often.
Also in 3-6 years there will yet again be some turnover in the LEC's that will put more ex-RJ/currently junior guys in elected roles who see the importance of continuing to improve that area.
I'm less than enamored with other areas of the TA, but scope doesn't bother me. I think the other part of our conversation will start to happen in 2015 if we go with this and go into another round in 2015, but you normally get a massive rejection if you ask for too much all at once (think of it like making out with the girls when you were in high school
).
Once we have put a fence around the DCI pen, we can shrink the pen as the numbers naturally dwindle (if we choose to, and I think most on here do).
I see it as step one in a multi-step game. Shorter contracts allow us to take another "step" in shorter time frames. Waiting for 7 years in between negotiations doesn't help us achieve improvements nearly as often.
Also in 3-6 years there will yet again be some turnover in the LEC's that will put more ex-RJ/currently junior guys in elected roles who see the importance of continuing to improve that area.
I'm less than enamored with other areas of the TA, but scope doesn't bother me. I think the other part of our conversation will start to happen in 2015 if we go with this and go into another round in 2015, but you normally get a massive rejection if you ask for too much all at once (think of it like making out with the girls when you were in high school
).I do not believe there are any guarantees that will will be able to limit DCI in three or so years. DAL will want the 102 70 seaters to become 76 seat or larger jets. We will be right on the cusp of retirements and they will be able to articulate need. Allowing more viable jets though on a smaller footprint is a way to leave the real debate and fighting to a later date. Will there be any leverage then? More leverage than we have now? I am not too sure. There is more at stake here that redoing RJ leases. This allows debt levels to come down now not in a year and a half. The target levels will be hit, thus allowing DAL to shop. They need this to go with the most preferred route.
Once this consolidation is done, I do not see there being the dual track leverage we have today. The question is, "Is what we see in this TA enough with the leverage we truly have to accept it and the risk of the environment being truly unfavorable or too favorable in 2015 and beyond?"
If this deal is approved, we all move on to the next battle. Good, we need to. We hit 2015 with a pilot group that has more pent up demands than we do today. We have have more frustrations from a SLI etc as well. The pressure cooker is going to demand a quantum leap in the valuation of the PWA. We all can see that. DAL is more than likely not going to want to redo this deal when profits may be double what they are today. A year passes and we get a great deal. One we all love in 2016-17. A year later based on the economic sign wave, we enter a recession.
POS96-anger-C2K-concessions
C2012-anger-C2015-concessions
Right there is my real concern over this deal. At the culmination of the next round of bargaining we will have asked and gotten another contract that significantly goes above the trend line and as a result the wording in this agreement that I do not like; the triggers and non compliance language, really sets us up to repeat 2002-2006. My internal debate on how I vote is significantly weighed on not repeating history and readjusting this deal now, which in turn will adjust the costing projections for the company going forward. It will smooth out the sign wave not yet seen by many and as a result dampen the shock waves we may be subject to by this TA's language and the resultant gains four to five years down the road.
To me this is a strategic exercise.
06-01-2012, 08:00 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
06-01-2012, 08:02 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2005
Position: 767ER capt
Posts: 1,190
Exactly,
In April we had a member of the 108 LEC on the jumpseat and he was telling us that the 717s would mean 1100 new pilot jobs. Now where did that go?
I think by spreading out the deliveries like they are and by using the MD90s as a guide, it will take significantly longer to bring them online. We keep talking about hiring but the line keeps getting pushed back. Without hiring, none of us on this board (except Carl) will really move up.
In April we had a member of the 108 LEC on the jumpseat and he was telling us that the 717s would mean 1100 new pilot jobs. Now where did that go?
I think by spreading out the deliveries like they are and by using the MD90s as a guide, it will take significantly longer to bring them online. We keep talking about hiring but the line keeps getting pushed back. Without hiring, none of us on this board (except Carl) will really move up.
That being said, the 717s will provide jobs, and will spur hiring.
06-01-2012, 08:03 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2005
Position: 767ER capt
Posts: 1,190
06-01-2012, 08:07 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
06-01-2012, 08:27 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: 7ERB
Posts: 142
06-01-2012, 08:33 AM
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
06-01-2012, 08:35 AM
Get's Every Day Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Retired
Posts: 1,860
Reserves Mission
IMHO, they don't pay reserves for how much they fly....they pay them to be AVAILABLE TO FLY when nobody else is available or willing to fly to make the schedule happen. If they do go over guarantee, then they get paid for WHAT THEY ACTUALLY FLY. Lets not mix these two up. There is value in that availability. If I choose to bid reserve, I don't want to be flying up to ALV unless it is absolutely necessary. I certainly don't want to fly to ALV + 15 (unless I voluntarily allow that to happen). I'd rather bid a schedule if I want to fly that much. For those forced to sit reserve...the TA reserve work rule changes are a major screw job. For those who have a choice, it is a major decline in QOL. Either way, the end result will cost us jobs that will be gone forever.
06-01-2012, 08:43 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
06-01-2012, 09:05 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,357
Did these men get it right?
Lee Moak
Tim O'Malley
Parri Olmstead
Mike Pinho
Rick Dominguez
Roger White
Rich Harwood
Ken Rogers
Let's not kid ourselves. I undoubtedly left a few names off the list but these are the men who wrote this contract. With stunning speed, the whole intricate (and time consuming) "process" was circumvented.
When we cast our vote the question we need to answer is do we trust the judgment of the handful of people who brought us this contract? This is not the contract the pilots wanted and it is not the contract the MEC wanted.
This was done by a very small group of people who decided what they thought was best for Delta Air Lines and the Delta pilots. They largely disregarded the survey, excluded the elected reps and cut a deal. They then used the powerful machinery at their disposal to get it out to membership ratification. The information and communication resources they control are formidable. They overwhelmed our MEC reps with National's lawyers, economists, political types warning about our chances at the NMB, etc. etc. They are doing the same with the pilot group as a whole.
Make no mistake. These are smart guys. Big picture guys. They've been in power a long time. They are not management but they clearly view themselves as managers of the pilot group. They are pilot advocates and they want everything they can get for the pilots but they also see themselves as responsible for the corporation's health. They believe deeply in the philosophy of labor participation in "corporate governance". They place great value on a pilot member of the board of directors. etc. etc.
I haven't seen the survey but it seems obvious that in many areas these people substituted their judgment for the collective wishes of the pilot group and our elected reps.
On the other hand, "Time value of money" is not just a slogan or cliche. It is real. The dysfunctional, anti-labor NMB is also real. These men made a strategic decision to make an end run around the long, torturous, drawn out NMB negotiation and mediation system that has undeniably been broken for the last decade. That may have been a stroke of brilliance and the best thing that ever happened or it may have cost us hundreds of millions. Would the Railway Labor Act have worked for us or slowly smothered us? That's the decision we have to make. Will we really do better by taking that long road?
It's done. Fait accompli. We have a TA. We are going to vote.
We need to decide -- did these men get it right?
Lee Moak
Tim O'Malley
Parri Olmstead
Mike Pinho
Rick Dominguez
Roger White
Rich Harwood
Ken Rogers
Let's not kid ourselves. I undoubtedly left a few names off the list but these are the men who wrote this contract. With stunning speed, the whole intricate (and time consuming) "process" was circumvented.
When we cast our vote the question we need to answer is do we trust the judgment of the handful of people who brought us this contract? This is not the contract the pilots wanted and it is not the contract the MEC wanted.
This was done by a very small group of people who decided what they thought was best for Delta Air Lines and the Delta pilots. They largely disregarded the survey, excluded the elected reps and cut a deal. They then used the powerful machinery at their disposal to get it out to membership ratification. The information and communication resources they control are formidable. They overwhelmed our MEC reps with National's lawyers, economists, political types warning about our chances at the NMB, etc. etc. They are doing the same with the pilot group as a whole.
Make no mistake. These are smart guys. Big picture guys. They've been in power a long time. They are not management but they clearly view themselves as managers of the pilot group. They are pilot advocates and they want everything they can get for the pilots but they also see themselves as responsible for the corporation's health. They believe deeply in the philosophy of labor participation in "corporate governance". They place great value on a pilot member of the board of directors. etc. etc.
I haven't seen the survey but it seems obvious that in many areas these people substituted their judgment for the collective wishes of the pilot group and our elected reps.
On the other hand, "Time value of money" is not just a slogan or cliche. It is real. The dysfunctional, anti-labor NMB is also real. These men made a strategic decision to make an end run around the long, torturous, drawn out NMB negotiation and mediation system that has undeniably been broken for the last decade. That may have been a stroke of brilliance and the best thing that ever happened or it may have cost us hundreds of millions. Would the Railway Labor Act have worked for us or slowly smothered us? That's the decision we have to make. Will we really do better by taking that long road?
It's done. Fait accompli. We have a TA. We are going to vote.
We need to decide -- did these men get it right?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
