Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
12-16-2012, 07:46 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
As I posted before the union is very aware of the deficit. There is however a lot of rumors that have been posted here and on other forums that are wrong about how the deficit occurred.
Adding Alitalia to the JV via the AF bailout would have put the company out of compliance with the EASK metric. the additional Alitalia flights dropped the EASK metric into the 46 to 47 percent range. We signed a LOA to allow the Alitalia bailout (lots of political aspects involved in this) which allowed that lower EASK however gave the company 3 years with a 1 year fix period to come back into compliance with the original EASK. Essentially we said yes you can have Alitalia but you must grow our operation in the next 3 years to offset their flights. The company agreed because they planned more expansion in Europe. That goes against the forum wisdom that the pulldown in Europe is about the JV's and not the economy.
As everyone knows we did not expand in Europe with the economic collapse. Our EASK portion of the flying has remained essentially the same meaning AF/KLM have also pulled back at about the same rate. The company however did not add the additional flying percentage wise required and it appears they do not intend to do so and will be out of compliance at the end of the 36 month measuring period.
It is anticipated that this will be incorporated in the talks concerning the VA joint venture. Talk to your reps if you have thoughts on what we should ask for because of the non compliance.
Adding Alitalia to the JV via the AF bailout would have put the company out of compliance with the EASK metric. the additional Alitalia flights dropped the EASK metric into the 46 to 47 percent range. We signed a LOA to allow the Alitalia bailout (lots of political aspects involved in this) which allowed that lower EASK however gave the company 3 years with a 1 year fix period to come back into compliance with the original EASK. Essentially we said yes you can have Alitalia but you must grow our operation in the next 3 years to offset their flights. The company agreed because they planned more expansion in Europe. That goes against the forum wisdom that the pulldown in Europe is about the JV's and not the economy.
As everyone knows we did not expand in Europe with the economic collapse. Our EASK portion of the flying has remained essentially the same meaning AF/KLM have also pulled back at about the same rate. The company however did not add the additional flying percentage wise required and it appears they do not intend to do so and will be out of compliance at the end of the 36 month measuring period.
It is anticipated that this will be incorporated in the talks concerning the VA joint venture. Talk to your reps if you have thoughts on what we should ask for because of the non compliance.
12-16-2012, 07:48 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Sailing,
Not trying to be argumentative. I appreciate your post.
We should not "ask" for anything. We should not trade members' jobs. Aside from being immoral, there is nothing reasonable we could ask for which could economically replace the loss of widebody Captain positions.
What you refer to as "essentially the same" is an actual loss of around 3.5 percent to as low as 44/56. Your block hour comparison was good information, but it does not change the contract. We were sold our forbearance in exchange for growth and believed management. The growth is a requirement of the contract we agreed to. Instead, we comparably shrank.
We must demand compliance. Nothing else will do. Any renegotiation of our JV must cure the deficit and close down the measurement window to a year or less. If we are to stipulate to a post cure remedy, it must be something which acts as a inpenetrable deterrent, perhaps an agreed release for self help.
Recall that Delta is paying for its share of the excess JV flying. Delta has control of this situation. We trusted management in good faith. if we are to maintain that good faith, there must be a good faith cure.
Your suggestion to write your Reps is good. Perhaps we even all pile in to the MEC meeting in February to lobby our own Reps.
Anyone know our MEC Chair's leanings on this issue?
We have an excellent group of pilots representing us, but, there will be those individuals voicing an opinion to trade compliance for some special interest trinket, or a trifle of pay. The majority who want Delta to invest in Delta, save Delta jobs and this Company's future need to ensure their voices are heard louder and more clearly.
Not trying to be argumentative. I appreciate your post.
We should not "ask" for anything. We should not trade members' jobs. Aside from being immoral, there is nothing reasonable we could ask for which could economically replace the loss of widebody Captain positions.
What you refer to as "essentially the same" is an actual loss of around 3.5 percent to as low as 44/56. Your block hour comparison was good information, but it does not change the contract. We were sold our forbearance in exchange for growth and believed management. The growth is a requirement of the contract we agreed to. Instead, we comparably shrank.
We must demand compliance. Nothing else will do. Any renegotiation of our JV must cure the deficit and close down the measurement window to a year or less. If we are to stipulate to a post cure remedy, it must be something which acts as a inpenetrable deterrent, perhaps an agreed release for self help.
Recall that Delta is paying for its share of the excess JV flying. Delta has control of this situation. We trusted management in good faith. if we are to maintain that good faith, there must be a good faith cure.
Your suggestion to write your Reps is good. Perhaps we even all pile in to the MEC meeting in February to lobby our own Reps.
Anyone know our MEC Chair's leanings on this issue?
We have an excellent group of pilots representing us, but, there will be those individuals voicing an opinion to trade compliance for some special interest trinket, or a trifle of pay. The majority who want Delta to invest in Delta, save Delta jobs and this Company's future need to ensure their voices are heard louder and more clearly.
12-16-2012, 07:56 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: No to large RJs
Posts: 369
Sailing,
Not trying to be argumentative. I appreciate your post.
We should not "ask" for anything. We should not trade members' jobs. Aside from being immoral, there is nothing reasonable we could ask for which could economically replace the loss of widebody Captain positions.
What you refer to as "essentially the same" is an actual loss of around 3.5 percent to as low as 44/56. Your block hour comparison was good information, but it does not change the contract. We were sold our forbearance in exchange for growth and believed management. The growth is a requirement of the contract we agreed to. Instead, we comparably shrank.
We must demand compliance. Nothing else will do. Any renegotiation of our JV must cure the deficit and close down the measurement window to a year or less. If we are to stipulate to a post cure remedy, it must be something which acts as a inpenetrable deterrent, perhaps an agreed release for self help.
Recall that Delta is paying for its share of the excess JV flying. Delta has control of this situation. We trusted management in good faith. if we are to maintain that good faith, there must be a good faith cure.
Your suggestion to write your Reps is good. Perhaps we even all pile in to the MEC meeting in February to lobby our own Reps.
Anyone know our MEC Chair's leanings on this issue?
We have an excellent group of pilots representing us, but, there will be those individuals voicing an opinion to trade compliance for some special interest trinket, or a trifle of pay. The majority who want Delta to invest in Delta, save Delta jobs and this Company's future need to ensure their voices are heard louder and more clearly.
Not trying to be argumentative. I appreciate your post.
We should not "ask" for anything. We should not trade members' jobs. Aside from being immoral, there is nothing reasonable we could ask for which could economically replace the loss of widebody Captain positions.
What you refer to as "essentially the same" is an actual loss of around 3.5 percent to as low as 44/56. Your block hour comparison was good information, but it does not change the contract. We were sold our forbearance in exchange for growth and believed management. The growth is a requirement of the contract we agreed to. Instead, we comparably shrank.
We must demand compliance. Nothing else will do. Any renegotiation of our JV must cure the deficit and close down the measurement window to a year or less. If we are to stipulate to a post cure remedy, it must be something which acts as a inpenetrable deterrent, perhaps an agreed release for self help.
Recall that Delta is paying for its share of the excess JV flying. Delta has control of this situation. We trusted management in good faith. if we are to maintain that good faith, there must be a good faith cure.
Your suggestion to write your Reps is good. Perhaps we even all pile in to the MEC meeting in February to lobby our own Reps.
Anyone know our MEC Chair's leanings on this issue?
We have an excellent group of pilots representing us, but, there will be those individuals voicing an opinion to trade compliance for some special interest trinket, or a trifle of pay. The majority who want Delta to invest in Delta, save Delta jobs and this Company's future need to ensure their voices are heard louder and more clearly.
12-16-2012, 07:58 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,014
Sailingfun:
Data point. Before Alitalia joined the JV, Delta's share of EASK were 51.7%. Pull AZ out of the data and we've lost around 2% - 3% (depending on the window, just trying to take an "honest" average).
Data point. Before Alitalia joined the JV, Delta's share of EASK were 51.7%. Pull AZ out of the data and we've lost around 2% - 3% (depending on the window, just trying to take an "honest" average).
12-16-2012, 08:01 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2012
Position: Short Bus FO
Posts: 456
No idea about the pay, but the PTP is a 48 hour buffer before you start training. It was one of the options on the AE bid. On mine, the first day after PTP is just checking into the hotel, and actual training starts the next morning.
12-16-2012, 08:14 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,014
Great post. One more important point to add is this sets a precedent. This will be the first non-compliance issue with these JV agreements any group has faced. We are blazing new trails here and the company must abide by the agreement. If they do not abide by the agreement, MGT must know in no uncertain terms our cooperation is over with any and all agreements going forward. It should not be up for re-negotiation in any deal with VA.
The Company may feel our cooperation is not needed. They did not involve our pilot leadership before entering into this agreement with Virgin Atlantic.
The trend has been for Delta management to violate scope, then negotiate their way out of compliance.
IMHO we broke a trend line with C2012. Our scope recovery is probably saving us from furloughs. We must keep up that good work by enforcing our contract. Selling Delta pilot jobs is not on the table. It may take a lot more than "non cooperation with future endeavors." We will see.
As for me, I like lobbying our government on behalf of Delta and ALPA. Hopefully this will be resolved.
12-16-2012, 08:54 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,423
Sailing,
Not trying to be argumentative. I appreciate your post.
We should not "ask" for anything. We should not trade members' jobs. Aside from being immoral, there is nothing reasonable we could ask for which could economically replace the loss of widebody Captain positions.
What you refer to as "essentially the same" is an actual loss of around 3.5 percent to as low as 44/56. Your block hour comparison was good information, but it does not change the contract. We were sold our forbearance in exchange for growth and believed management. The growth is a requirement of the contract we agreed to. Instead, we comparably shrank.
We must demand compliance. Nothing else will do. Any renegotiation of our JV must cure the deficit and close down the measurement window to a year or less. If we are to stipulate to a post cure remedy, it must be something which acts as a inpenetrable deterrent, perhaps an agreed release for self help.
Recall that Delta is paying for its share of the excess JV flying. Delta has control of this situation. We trusted management in good faith. if we are to maintain that good faith, there must be a good faith cure.
Your suggestion to write your Reps is good. Perhaps we even all pile in to the MEC meeting in February to lobby our own Reps.
Anyone know our MEC Chair's leanings on this issue?
We have an excellent group of pilots representing us, but, there will be those individuals voicing an opinion to trade compliance for some special interest trinket, or a trifle of pay. The majority who want Delta to invest in Delta, save Delta jobs and this Company's future need to ensure their voices are heard louder and more clearly.
Not trying to be argumentative. I appreciate your post.
We should not "ask" for anything. We should not trade members' jobs. Aside from being immoral, there is nothing reasonable we could ask for which could economically replace the loss of widebody Captain positions.
What you refer to as "essentially the same" is an actual loss of around 3.5 percent to as low as 44/56. Your block hour comparison was good information, but it does not change the contract. We were sold our forbearance in exchange for growth and believed management. The growth is a requirement of the contract we agreed to. Instead, we comparably shrank.
We must demand compliance. Nothing else will do. Any renegotiation of our JV must cure the deficit and close down the measurement window to a year or less. If we are to stipulate to a post cure remedy, it must be something which acts as a inpenetrable deterrent, perhaps an agreed release for self help.
Recall that Delta is paying for its share of the excess JV flying. Delta has control of this situation. We trusted management in good faith. if we are to maintain that good faith, there must be a good faith cure.
Your suggestion to write your Reps is good. Perhaps we even all pile in to the MEC meeting in February to lobby our own Reps.
Anyone know our MEC Chair's leanings on this issue?
We have an excellent group of pilots representing us, but, there will be those individuals voicing an opinion to trade compliance for some special interest trinket, or a trifle of pay. The majority who want Delta to invest in Delta, save Delta jobs and this Company's future need to ensure their voices are heard louder and more clearly.
Your point is valid going forward. By the time the process runs its course the company will have had 4 plus years of non compliance. You can not impose retroactive flying. There has to be a penalty to the company for that time period.
12-16-2012, 10:11 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: Retired, again...
Posts: 608
Just curious...why did you delete my reply to Gunship Guy ??
Regards,
BG
12-16-2012, 10:24 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,014
Guess we will have to penalize them by getting them to invest in their own Company, if we can.
12-16-2012, 10:39 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: A big one that looks like a little one
Posts: 633
Did you tell her that 42% more than nothing was still nothing?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
