Originally Posted by alfaromeo

No, what's really good is that the pilot group is much smarter than you think. Rather than get bamboozled by your type of mindless propaganda, they could apply the most basic principles of common sense and Econ 101 to realize that this was a great deal.

Let's just examine some basic facts. In rough justice numbers, Delta pilots generate about $36 billion in revenue every year and cost the company about $2 billion. So when Delta adds flying to mainline they don't expect revenue neutrality they expect you to add revenue on a 18 to 1 basis from your cost. Seriously, is this a surprise to anyone that has had even a week's worth of economics instruction. Even a second grader running a lemonade stands knows she needs to generate more revenue than costs in order to make a profit. Delta Air Lines is a capitalistic organization it is not a charity operation.

So in this deal, there were costs shifted from RJ maintenance to pilot salaries and benefits and acquisition of new aircraft. They expect that in the end it is not profit neutral, but that they generate more profits. That is the reason that people invested billions of dollars in Delta Air Lines, they want to make a profit. Right, please someone stop me if I am moving too fast here, because this all seems pretty basic. When Delta buys new aircraft they expect them to be self financing also. Why else would anyone invest billions in new aluminum if they didn't think that the aircraft would generate revenue that would pay the cost of acquisition, the cost of operations, and every other cost, and THEN GENERATE A PROFIT. Once again, these are the most basic of facts, people start capitalistic businesses to make money.

So, the idea that pilots will capture all of the revenue they generate is insane. The idea that pilots will capture all of the profits of a company is insane. The idea that management wants to generate a business plan to increase profits should pretty much fall in the DUHHHHHHH category. If along the way we can make a deal that adds a billion dollars into our pockets while allowing Delta to reduce other costs and generate more revenue, that is a no brainer.

So, we are fortunate that pilots are not easily fooled by this type of mindless propaganda. By an overwhelming majority, they saw through this type of sham argument and saw that adding mainline flying, adding vacation, adding reserve guarantee pay, increasing pay rates by 20%, increasing retirement income, and numerous other improvements just made sense. In fact, it wasn't even close.

So rather than substitute their own good judgement for mindless internet bloviation, they used their intelligence and common sense to make what really is an easy decision. More mainline flying, more pay, more benefits, works for me.

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

10,500 x $129,000 = 9,000 x $150,000

I'd rather have more people than pay per hour since I can make up the difference moving to higher paying categories which would actually have vacancies.

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp

Well, now the first bid is upon us with the more work to mainline (i.e. +717), and I'm reading a lot about displacements and keep seeing "overstaffed" repeated in the menus.

I really look forward to some movement in the correct direction!

Originally Posted by Falcon7

If you are talking about displacements from the domestic 767, those displacements have been going on for some time and were coming regardless of the contract.

We were also overstaffed, that's why the company wanted an early retirement package.

The 717 will provide upgrade opportunities for some and a fall back for others. The increase in pay rates will help reduce the sting of displacements to lower paying equipment.

Without the 717s arriving as fast as they will be, this upcoming AE probably would be very ugly.

Originally Posted by Falcon7

That sums it up.

I guess I don't understand all the hand wringing by some here. All this cost neutral stuff makes no sense.

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

Can I watch episodes on netflix?

Originally Posted by orvil

That was one of my favorite TV shows.

She doesn't know it. But, I've had sex with her before.

Many times.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

As I and many others stated before the TA vote, the TA was cost neutral to Delta. We didn't make that up, we were simply posting Richard and Ed's quotes to various financial media. So it's not a question of making sense to you or not, it's simply quoting our executive leadership.

Now, why was/is this an important question? It's important because people like alfaromeo and others within the MEC administration vehemently denied any characterization of the TA as cost neutral to Delta...despite executive leadership stating the exact opposite. The MEC administration felt they had to try to kill the cost neutral description or risk being thought of as management stooges by the membership. It was this vehement attack against the cost neutral description that is the concern. Is that what an MEC should be doing during the membership decision phase of a TA vote? Shouldn't an MEC just put out the TA and let us decide? And shouldn't an MEC let the words of our executive leadership speak for themselves?

Carl

Originally Posted by Imapilot2

Continues to amaze me that guys get upset or are shocked by the information and the way it is presented in earning calls and other types of public reports. They use this communication to bolster their fight against the atrocities committed against pilots in our last agreement. Given the audience they are courting, what do you think the theme and tone is going to be? Would you really want this type of investor and public communication to be pro-employee? or pro-company economics?