Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
02-17-2013, 02:14 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Posts: 710
Per the contract isn't the company required to "enact its plan?"
02-17-2013, 04:15 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 581
That's a darn good question, and I sure hope DALPA holds DAL's feet to the fire on this...
I could potentially see calculations as to the number of Captain and First Officer positions that have been eliminated by DAL's failure to be in compliance with the ratios, and the resulting salaries they haven't paid out. At that point I could see that amount of money distributed to the pilot group as a whole.
(Of course if DALPA stays true to form, the distribution methodology will heavily favor the senior pilots. Sorry, but that seems to always be the case...)
But when you think about it, that falls way short. Just for the sake of argument let's say that it would take an extra 750 pilots to operate a schedule that was in compliance with the ratios. It's not just the money. Advancement also brings about improvements to QOL issues from being able to hold a better schedule, etc. I don't know how you'd quantify that...
02-17-2013, 04:24 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Position: Lowest Pay I Could Find
Posts: 1,044
That's a darn good question, and I sure hope DALPA holds DAL's feet to the fire on this...
I could potentially see calculations as to the number of Captain and First Officer positions that have been eliminated by DAL's failure to be in compliance with the ratios, and the resulting salaries they haven't paid out. At that point I could see that amount of money distributed to the pilot group as a whole.
(Of course if DALPA stays true to form, the distribution methodology will heavily favor the senior pilots. Sorry, but that seems to always be the case...)
But when you think about it, that falls way short. Just for the sake of argument let's say that it would take an extra 750 pilots to operate a schedule that was in compliance with the ratios. It's not just the money. Advancement also brings about improvements to QOL issues from being able to hold a better schedule, etc. I don't know how you'd quantify that...
I could potentially see calculations as to the number of Captain and First Officer positions that have been eliminated by DAL's failure to be in compliance with the ratios, and the resulting salaries they haven't paid out. At that point I could see that amount of money distributed to the pilot group as a whole.
(Of course if DALPA stays true to form, the distribution methodology will heavily favor the senior pilots. Sorry, but that seems to always be the case...)
But when you think about it, that falls way short. Just for the sake of argument let's say that it would take an extra 750 pilots to operate a schedule that was in compliance with the ratios. It's not just the money. Advancement also brings about improvements to QOL issues from being able to hold a better schedule, etc. I don't know how you'd quantify that...
02-17-2013, 05:03 PM
Moderator
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 6,946
That's a darn good question, and I sure hope DALPA holds DAL's feet to the fire on this...
I could potentially see calculations as to the number of Captain and First Officer positions that have been eliminated by DAL's failure to be in compliance with the ratios, and the resulting salaries they haven't paid out. At that point I could see that amount of money distributed to the pilot group as a whole.
(Of course if DALPA stays true to form, the distribution methodology will heavily favor the senior pilots. Sorry, but that seems to always be the case...)
But when you think about it, that falls way short. Just for the sake of argument let's say that it would take an extra 750 pilots to operate a schedule that was in compliance with the ratios. It's not just the money. Advancement also brings about improvements to QOL issues from being able to hold a better schedule, etc. I don't know how you'd quantify that...
I could potentially see calculations as to the number of Captain and First Officer positions that have been eliminated by DAL's failure to be in compliance with the ratios, and the resulting salaries they haven't paid out. At that point I could see that amount of money distributed to the pilot group as a whole.
(Of course if DALPA stays true to form, the distribution methodology will heavily favor the senior pilots. Sorry, but that seems to always be the case...)
But when you think about it, that falls way short. Just for the sake of argument let's say that it would take an extra 750 pilots to operate a schedule that was in compliance with the ratios. It's not just the money. Advancement also brings about improvements to QOL issues from being able to hold a better schedule, etc. I don't know how you'd quantify that...
I have come to the conclusion that the only way these deals will work out is if the penalty for non-compliance is spelled out ahead of time.
A good example is pulling 6 seats out of the RJs is the company does XXXXX. It is spelled out in black and white and the company knows what will trigger it and they have avoided triggering it.
Saying that we will play ball (whatever the issue is) now and in the future the company will do XXXXX seems to be a big failure. Because the company eventually may not do XXXX and we are left to ponder the consequences on a Web board.
Now this issue is a lot more complicated than this - for instance a lot of what the company does, they can do without DALPA's blessing even though they would like to have the Pilots on-board. I get that - All I am asking for is that when we come to the agreements spell out the terms and consequences of non-compliance ahead of time.
I have said DALPA does not have a great track record on this issue but at times they have fought hard and won - fighting the Force-Majeure and winning the no furlough clause fight after the Gulf War comes to mind. At other times they have been very unimpressive - Scope related issues comes to mind here.
Scoop
02-17-2013, 06:09 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,530
In light of a significant company turn around and current stability and profitability, especially relative to the rest of the legacy industry, I would be really curious as to the company's initial offers and how far dalpa moved the needle to end up with the current offer.
02-17-2013, 07:22 PM
Line Holder
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 42
When PCS for MAR opens this week does the first run go in seniority order or first in que?
02-17-2013, 08:04 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
I have come to the conclusion that the only way these deals will work out is if the penalty for non-compliance is spelled out ahead of time.
A good example is pulling 6 seats out of the RJs is the company does XXXXX. It is spelled out in black and white and the company knows what will trigger it and they have avoided triggering it.
Saying that we will play ball (whatever the issue is) now and in the future the company will do XXXXX seems to be a big failure. Because the company eventually may not do XXXX and we are left to ponder the consequences on a Web board.
Now this issue is a lot more complicated than this - for instance a lot of what the company does, they can do without DALPA's blessing even though they would like to have the Pilots on-board. I get that - All I am asking for is that when we come to the agreements spell out the terms and consequences of non-compliance ahead of time.
I have said DALPA does not have a great track record on this issue but at times they have fought hard and won - fighting the Force-Majeure and winning the no furlough clause fight after the Gulf War comes to mind. At other times they have been very unimpressive - Scope related issues comes to mind here.
Scoop
A good example is pulling 6 seats out of the RJs is the company does XXXXX. It is spelled out in black and white and the company knows what will trigger it and they have avoided triggering it.
Saying that we will play ball (whatever the issue is) now and in the future the company will do XXXXX seems to be a big failure. Because the company eventually may not do XXXX and we are left to ponder the consequences on a Web board.
Now this issue is a lot more complicated than this - for instance a lot of what the company does, they can do without DALPA's blessing even though they would like to have the Pilots on-board. I get that - All I am asking for is that when we come to the agreements spell out the terms and consequences of non-compliance ahead of time.
I have said DALPA does not have a great track record on this issue but at times they have fought hard and won - fighting the Force-Majeure and winning the no furlough clause fight after the Gulf War comes to mind. At other times they have been very unimpressive - Scope related issues comes to mind here.
Scoop
Although I can't speak personally to your last paragraph because I wasn't here.
02-17-2013, 11:01 PM
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
Look's like the rumored squabble with AS may have some credence. LAX-SEA is going to 1x 757, 1x 738, and 1xCR9... and MEM-SEA is returning for the summer with 1x A320.
02-18-2013, 03:53 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: 7ER Capt
Posts: 461
02-18-2013, 04:24 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
