Avgwhitemale

I am not an alarmist but it seems to me we are falling further and further behind in the international market. I must admit I am a lowly domestic guy. From where I sit we seem to have a nice little domestic feed to an extremely modest international feed. We really don't a robust wb fleet (and no realistic wb orders) to compete with these foreign carriers. To me, DAL seems to be running most international operations through JVs, etc. Given today's first quarter earnings I agree the company is making money and on a good track. From a pilot POV, have we allowed the company too much slack when it comes to JVs?

gloopy

I agree. That effects over all staffing in a zero sum game kind of way. The company is not going to staff more reserve pilots total just so that they can have that same number of pilots "sit at home all month." Senior reserves don't have any right to never fly any more than senior line holders have that right. That is a rediculous way to allocate our bargaining leverage while increasing the cost of our labor for massively disproportionate gain in favor of tiny little empires.

While we're at it, how about a 6th week of vacation and touch drop vacation? That way guys in 9-12 day trip categories can get 2 months off for every "week" vacation (times 6 = the whole year off! Weeeeeeeee! Think of the hiring!!!!) while junior narrowbody pilots get 3 or 4 days. But it will force hiring and we will all move up!

Yet if we have the ability to negotiate that nonsense, we have the ability to significantly increase pay and fix many other things that need fixing.

Free Mason

Remember that back then, there were:

SC windows twice a day four hours long

Reserve X days were hard lines with off days in which pilots bid for. Now we have PBS assigning off days exclusively on seniority and most junior pilots are getting unstacked (seniority on reserve) but you would now add in a second layer of seniority on reserve.

Back then tight staffing was round 22% reserves. Now it will be closer to 10%.

Going straight seniority sounds good in principle, but remember that there were levelers back then too; no PBS awards for reserve lines, maxes etc.

It does not mean more staffing, because now we have a PBS manning formula. It means that junior pilots will fly to 99 hrs or close in the summer, fly all winter and generally not have a break. We have a reserve staffing formula too.

We have no cap or bow wave either.


Make sure before you think that this will not pit junior v senior because just like pay, there are many things that are not back to the way they were pre CH11. Changing one like we see with buckets does not mean that it will be better.

Ideas are good and I bet the MEC will debate this issue at length next week.

Free Mason

The converse argument could be made too. They need more slack to compete with EK

gloopy

Exactly. This isn't about staffing either way. Buckets are a good idea because guys, junior or senior on RSV, would get hosed because of 1 RAW point. Sometimes the guy who wanted the trip wouldn't get it while the guy who really didn't want it would (usually turning a RSV group into 2 extra days for being double non commutable, etc) so to avoid an overly rigid system that mercilessly dished out assignments blindly by a single RAW point we went to buckets of 80?



We don't have to scrap the whole thing. Maybe we can just back it off a knot or two.

Avgwhitemale

I think you have shed light on our near future. As a pilot group, we must determine how much top end scope we are willing to part with so the company can make money and compete. Once this is gone it will be gone forever. Looking at our seniority list we can say this issue really wont have an impact on the top 33% or so. They are rapidly nearing retirement and most of them are already living the dream on big iron. The bottom 66% as well as future new hires must band together on this very issue. Top end scope will significantly impact our futures as DAL pilots.

gloopy

Lolwhat?....

Herkflyr

I'm with you. From the text of these resolutions (and I was not at the meeting) this seems like nothing but whining from a bunch of very set in their ways sorts.

1. The reserve resolution was to completely eliminate all RAW and all buckets, making reserve which is currently a sort of good deal for the senior guys (depending on category, time of year, etc) even more of a good deal. I'm supposed to want the negotiators to waste valuable negotiating capital on that?

2. The 767 resolution to have a domesti-only "sub-group" in the soon combined ATL 7ER category.

There is no way the company, after having spent years slowly drawing down the domestic-only 767 categories, is going to recreate a "domestic-lite" version of the same within the 7ER category. Why would they? I flew in the domestic category for several years, and have flown in the ATL 7ER category for several as well. NO WHERE at the airline are guys more set in their ways, unwilling to embrace anything new, etc., than in the ATL senior domestic categories (think ATL 767 and the senior half of the 73N). These guys love to fly domestic and are upset that they will have to fly two TOEs (and that's it) and MIGHT be rerouted into international flying during irregular ops (the odds of that are very slim by the way).

So what. The world changes. We don't fly 727s any more and we don't have flight engineers any more. In a similar vein we soon won't have any more dedicated domestic 767 categories. So what. Do your two TOEs, nod your head when the LCA is telling you all sorts of oceanic stuff, enjoy a couple of tasty European brews or South American steaks, then ram dump it all and go right back to the domestic flying that you always liked (and that I like).

There are pros and cons both from a company and pilot standpoint to keeping separate categories, and there are pros and cons to combining them. The company has elected to go with a philosophy of combining them. Accept it and move on. I had hoped that we would be flying 757s for decades to come. But Boeing has decided not to build those airplanes any more, and the 737-900 (and maybe the A321) is the future plane for many routes the 757 currently flies that I enjoy flying. While I don't like it, I have accepted it. As I get old (er) I have accepted that if I want to be a captain at DAL and fly transcons and caribbean turns, etc, then it won't be in a 757 for much longer, much as I wish it would be.

I feel that this resolution would represent a waste of time and negotiating capital.

Fire away.

LeineLodge

All reasons I think it will probably NOT happen. Doesn't hurt to explore the various options.

Gloopy: to be clear, I'm not advocating for empires where guys get paid to do nothing. Again, what we're seeing now is an anomaly due to some categories being overstaffed. That's a short-time good deal for a few that will be ending on/around Memorial Day.

The other side of your argument could be "let's give back a week of vacation so senior guys don't get to work less. That way things can be more fair."

It's all a balancing act, but I'm generally in favor of ideas that provide better QOL (in seniority order) while increasing pay wherever possible. FWIW FTB will soon be senior to me in our category. I'm still for more seniority on reserve. If its my turn to take the less desirable trip or fly the weekends, then that should be FTBs "good deal" for being senior to me.

gloopy

There have been disasterous "what were they thinking" MBA idiocy buybacks in the past to be sure. But at least by buying back in the $15 range would help share prices/shareholders while also reducing outstanding share pressures, particularly to an LBO if our long term debt numbers are headed as low as some have suggested they will.

With a dividend there may be positive pressure on prices, but only as long as the dividend continues. Stopping it would be viewed as a sign of weakness and likely result in lower prices anyway, and we'd still have the same number of outstanding shares. At least with a buyback we'd get something.

That said I'd rather they put that money into paying down more debt, investing more in employees and stepping up our IFE game across the board instead of playing footsies with a hyper fickle airline investment community, especially one that still follows the overall financial health of any given airline in the first place. Why divert badly needed funds to bribe them to do what they would have done anyway had that same money been directed towards running a company/balance sheet even better than it is already?