Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > Delta
Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? >

Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Search

Notices

Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-08-2012, 07:14 PM
  #103221  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by finis72
Carl, unless I"m mistaken Carl each years raise is compounded;4, 8.5,3,3. What isn't compounded is the 2% reduction in profit sharing. I think your fully funded by concessions is just not true. What Elvis and I disagree on is the amount of additional cost to DL,again, additional cost to DL.Get it?
Your argument is not with me finis, it's with RA, ED and Austin Powers. They're all on the record and in writing. Are they lying?

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 06-08-2012, 07:16 PM
  #103222  
On Reserve
 
Elvis90's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: MSP7ERB
Posts: 1,886
Default

Buenas Noches all...gotta fly mañana.
Elvis90 is offline  
Old 06-08-2012, 07:19 PM
  #103223  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: DAL FO
Posts: 2,174
Default

Originally Posted by Elvis90
Buenas Noches all...gotta fly mañana.
Buen viaje
LeineLodge is offline  
Old 06-08-2012, 07:21 PM
  #103224  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by LeineLodge
Who cares? This DPA talking point...
Uh, nobody's talking about DPA except you. Which by the way, is a new DALPA talking point. Anytime somebody points out something you don't like, refer to it as a DPA talking point. It's tired already.

Originally Posted by LeineLodge
I could care less if this TA SAVES the company money. It can be cost neutral to them all they want. As long as they are taking $ from a bucket that is not currently allocated to pilots then it isn't cost neutral to us. That's all I care about.
That's not what I said. I said: "Every cost increase in this TA is FULL FUNDED by CONCESSIONS in this TA." Again, your argument is with RA, ED and smiley...not with me. Why don't you call them and tell them they're lying about our TA.

Originally Posted by LeineLodge
Standing by for a shelling.
No shellling, just want you to be clear where I'm hearing this.

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 06-08-2012, 07:27 PM
  #103225  
Gets Weekends Off
 
finis72's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: 777 Sim Instructor
Posts: 745
Default

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
Your argument is not with me finis, it's with RA, ED and Austin Powers. They're all on the record and in writing. Are they lying?

Carl
This is why I said I was done posting,I keep having to repeat myself,it's like crack and I keep coming back,I have to remember to take my meds. The increased pilot costs are supposedly going to be offset by DL's ability to generate more revenue by upgaging the RJ fleet and adding 717's so they tell wall street it is cost neutral. The increased pilot cost to DL is over 1 bil for this TA. You're a smart man, the balance sheet stays the same, revenue up, pilot cost up.
finis72 is offline  
Old 06-08-2012, 07:32 PM
  #103226  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: DAL FO
Posts: 2,174
Default

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
Uh, nobody's talking about DPA except you. Which by the way, is a new DALPA talking point. Anytime somebody points out something you don't like, refer to it as a DPA talking point. It's tired already.



That's not what I said. I said: "Every cost increase in this TA is FULL FUNDED by CONCESSIONS in this TA." Again, your argument is with RA, ED and smiley...not with me. Why don't you call them and tell them they're lying about our TA.



No shellling, just want you to be clear where I'm hearing this.

Carl
I'm not buying it. Exactly what other parts of the contract are funding our significant (compared to industry peers, matching SWA) pay increase?

Furthermore, I couldn't care less if they are lying. I'm analyzing the TA on it's own merits. They can say what they want about it. It puts more money in my pocket ASAP and tightens up our scope (I'll pre-agree to disagree as I know your stance on that.) For me that's more than enough.

Side question, as I'm really curious on this one. What is your opinion of the JV language in the TA versus what we have now? Do you consider it worthless because it was written by ALPA lawyers? What cost/value would you attribute to that if things go south in NRT and Delta suddently wants to JV away our Pacific flying?

Last edited by LeineLodge; 06-08-2012 at 07:36 PM. Reason: clarified "pay increase"
LeineLodge is offline  
Old 06-08-2012, 07:42 PM
  #103227  
Gets Weekends Off
 
finis72's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: 777 Sim Instructor
Posts: 745
Default

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
Your argument is not with me finis, it's with RA, ED and Austin Powers. They're all on the record and in writing. Are they lying?

Carl
By the way Carl, RA,ED,and MC all said it was a cost neutral contract.Not 1 of them said anything at all about pilot concessions covering increased pilot costs. Carl, you and all the other naysayers go back and listen or read exactly what the boys said and then come back and apologies will be accepted.
finis72 is offline  
Old 06-08-2012, 08:13 PM
  #103228  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by LeineLodge
I'm not buying it. Exactly what other parts of the contract are funding our significant (compared to industry peers, matching SWA) pay increase?
I don't know what other parts of the TA are funding it, Ed and RA didn't say. If I had to guess, I would say it's being funded by our very large concession on ALV's and reserves...which is huge. I would also say it's management's plan to remove higher paying mainline jets, and replace them with much lower paying mainline jets. That's REALLY huge. Again, that's just my prediction...because management was silent on those details.

And by the way, we will NOT be at pay parity with SWA at the end of this TA. Not even close. We might be near pay RATE parity, but nowhere close to compensation parity.

Originally Posted by LeineLodge
Side question, as I'm really curious on this one. What is your opinion of the JV language in the TA versus what we have now? Do you consider it worthless because it was written by ALPA lawyers? What cost/value would you attribute to that if things go south in NRT and Delta suddently wants to JV away our Pacific flying?
The JV language is OK. But it shows me that management only gave it away because they had no intention of ever needing it. Instead, they fought REALLY hard and GOT their additional 70 mainline replacement jets. In my view, they fought for that because they have every intention of using it.

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 06-08-2012, 10:28 PM
  #103229  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Space Shuttle PIC
Posts: 2,007
Default

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
I don't know what other parts of the TA are funding it, Ed and RA didn't say. If I had to guess, I would say it's being funded by our very large concession on ALV's and reserves...which is huge. I would also say it's management's plan to remove higher paying mainline jets, and replace them with much lower paying mainline jets. That's REALLY huge. Again, that's just my prediction...because management was silent on those details.

And by the way, we will NOT be at pay parity with SWA at the end of this TA. Not even close. We might be near pay RATE parity, but nowhere close to compensation parity.



The JV language is OK. But it shows me that management only gave it away because they had no intention of ever needing it. Instead, they fought REALLY hard and GOT their additional 70 mainline replacement jets. In my view, they fought for that because they have every intention of using it.

Carl
Carl,

Do you see huge productivity for our reserves this Fall, if the TA is voted in? This company is staffed for 2 months only, JULY and AUGUST. The rest we are overmanned. This Fall we are cutting routes like JFK to FCO, for the first time in decades, until next Spring. But, you think reserves are going to fly 99 hours? If so, I am bidding reserve! It sure will beat the 66 hour line I got 3 months ago. That was great..... I live in base, so I'm going to bid reserve, fly 99 hours per month, and fly 1000 hours in 10 months, and have two months off. Ok, 1 month thanks to vacation. I can handle that! Sweet! Hopefully it will be December.
Bill Lumberg is offline  
Old 06-09-2012, 08:24 AM
  #103230  
Gets Weekends Off
 
dragon's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Dismayed
Posts: 1,598
Default

Since this thread was started to discuss hiring, we've come a long way. Now when I logged in this morning I was a little surprised no one was talking about the SD weekly address where he discusses the need to hire in the fall of 2012 if the good lord is willing and the creek don't rise, of course.

I would love more than anything to see some actual hiring here. Any forward movement at all would be welcome and I think would go a long way to raising morale. The question is whether this is genuine or if it's just pandering to the junior folks who seem to be the most against the TA. I hope its for our eventual world dominance.
dragon is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
On Autopilot
Regional
22594
11-05-2021 07:03 AM
AeroCrewSolut
Delta
153
08-14-2018 12:18 PM
Bill Lumberg
Major
71
06-13-2012 08:36 AM
Quagmire
Major
253
04-16-2011 06:19 AM
JiffyLube
Major
12
03-07-2008 04:27 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices