Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-11-2013, 02:38 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: A big one that looks like a little one
Posts: 633
Very, very well said.
To the pilots who state: "Well you show me the strategy that should have been used and maybe I'll get excited..." You must remember what we DID do. We took management's first offer before Section 6 negotiations even began. We were told management said: "This is a time critical deal..." "We're not able to give any more than this..." "The next offer will be much worse..." Our union leadership took the deal, THEN tried to convince our reps after the fact. When that didn't work, our union leadership went on an extremely one-sided sales/scare campaign dictated to them by the words of management. Many members hated the deal, but voted YES because of how badly mismanaged our union leadership was, and that our union leadership really didn't even know how to extract more from management...or didn't want to.
That was the "strategy" used last time. If you're really questioning what if anything should be done next time, start with actually demanding more than what the company SAYS they're willing to give. Second by PROVING to management that the days of being manipulated by fear tactics created by them and dutifully communicated by their partners in DALPA are over.
If we can't or won't do this, expect nothing but a career of disappointment.
Carl
05-11-2013, 02:44 PM
Moderator
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 6,946
Actually, I think he just stated the case that the concensus in the lounge was that the union boyz acted prudently. As for JBLU, sure no union and no union dues, but also $30 less/hour for a 12 year captain, fewer benefits, fewer work rules, no grievance process, at will worker, yada, yada, ya... no thanks, I'll keep my union.
Not saying that JBLU has it better than us but how many 12 year Captains do we have at DAL?
Scoop
05-11-2013, 03:04 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,014
-The negotiators would have been directed to walk away from the table during this past negotiation.
-The strike mobilization committee would have been put to work.
-The policy manual would have been followed and reps would have been allowed to actually give direction.
I am required, because of agency shop, to pay dues to an organization that does not completely look after my interests. I am not proposing that there is a better CBA out there either, just stating a fact as I see it. I support the PAC and am personally pleased with several of their recent victories. I feel that our DALPA admin is in this for their own agendas and not for the best interests of the line pilot. Unfortunately they continue to have the power.
I don't know if I'm some weird outlier either. I am informed, but IMO, we are either grossly outgunned or we have acquiesced all of our negotiation ability due to outsourcing, maybe both.
05-11-2013, 03:08 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,014
Giving cash to investors reduces the capital in the business.
If there were any way to turn that money into MORE MONEY, then that way would be better than throwing cash out the window.
If you will recall, Leo Mullin did a big stock buy back. The value of those shares were eventually nothing. A complete and absolute waste of money.
As labor, my preferred use for cash is growing the business in a profitable and sustainable way. The dividend is a sign we are out of ideas.
05-11-2013, 03:12 PM
Straight QOL, homie
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
Posts: 4,202
we're blue collar labor. we're not upper management.
ALPA must, first and foremost, ensure that WE'RE taken care of. Not the executives, not the investors. That's someone else's problem. If ALPA can't grasp that fact, it's our own fault for letting them bargain for us.
It's time to face the facts.
-We settled on a concessionary contract when the company was wildly profitable.
-We will likely never have the negotiating capital we just squandered.
-Someone else is enjoying money that should be in our pockets.
-ALPA is NOT getting the job done (at least for us pilots). I guess they're doing a bang-up job furthering the company's goals.
05-11-2013, 03:13 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,014
ALPA's looking out for us, they just are not letting us participate in the management of the thing we own.
05-11-2013, 03:14 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: 7ERA
Posts: 269
Ok.. Trying to look at all this objectively, what has changed in the last 6 months? Profit projections etc are all the same, but the difference is that company is trying to reward shareholders by taking some of that profit and returning it to them.
The goal of a corporation as I remember from "bidness" school, is to "increase shareholder wealth." It appears that is what Delta is trying to do. (Wonder what they may have planned once the stock increases as many deals tend to involve stock)
So, the pie if you will, appears to be about as projected but it is all about what the company, or any company does with it. Look at companies that are sitting on 25 billion is cash.. Why are they not giving it to their employees? Why are companies like UPS who have make much more than Delta, not just sending it to the pilots? Why have the pilots or other employees not been able to demand it by just not doing xy or z?
Why do you not pay the kid that cuts your grass more? Certainly most of you could afford to pay him a lot more, but you don't... Why? (Just an analogy as I cut my own grass)
Where is the leverage to "force" the company to give us that cash? No emotional banter, give me the plan and real world airline examples in the last 15 years.. I see FedEx, ups, southwest, all profitable but no huge gains. I see Spirit who actually went on strike, but didn't hit a home run.
So again thinking of the mission of a corporation, yes there is a point where paying employees does create value for the shareholders and there is a point where it does not. Nobody ever knows for sure exactly where the CEO is willing to go (except for the folks on here) in that balancing act, but there certainly is a point where the CEO is willing to say "no" no matter what the leverage.
Don't get me wrong, I want all I can get, but it ain't as easy as some on here make it appear and there certainly is not a "do xyz" and the cash comes rolling in. Now, there may be a different strategy than DALPA's constructive engagement and I am ok with that as well, but you will have show me the examples, tell me how it would work here before I get too excited.
The goal of a corporation as I remember from "bidness" school, is to "increase shareholder wealth." It appears that is what Delta is trying to do. (Wonder what they may have planned once the stock increases as many deals tend to involve stock)
So, the pie if you will, appears to be about as projected but it is all about what the company, or any company does with it. Look at companies that are sitting on 25 billion is cash.. Why are they not giving it to their employees? Why are companies like UPS who have make much more than Delta, not just sending it to the pilots? Why have the pilots or other employees not been able to demand it by just not doing xy or z?
Why do you not pay the kid that cuts your grass more? Certainly most of you could afford to pay him a lot more, but you don't... Why? (Just an analogy as I cut my own grass)
Where is the leverage to "force" the company to give us that cash? No emotional banter, give me the plan and real world airline examples in the last 15 years.. I see FedEx, ups, southwest, all profitable but no huge gains. I see Spirit who actually went on strike, but didn't hit a home run.
So again thinking of the mission of a corporation, yes there is a point where paying employees does create value for the shareholders and there is a point where it does not. Nobody ever knows for sure exactly where the CEO is willing to go (except for the folks on here) in that balancing act, but there certainly is a point where the CEO is willing to say "no" no matter what the leverage.
Don't get me wrong, I want all I can get, but it ain't as easy as some on here make it appear and there certainly is not a "do xyz" and the cash comes rolling in. Now, there may be a different strategy than DALPA's constructive engagement and I am ok with that as well, but you will have show me the examples, tell me how it would work here before I get too excited.
Little lost on the reply. I responded to why certain screen names are not on here, and did not respond to anything to do with Delta's investment strategy.
In response to that. The whole thing is a three sided stool. Employees, Stake Holders and Capex. You need to take care of all three to support the seat(DAL)
If the goal is to get to investment grade to get lower interest debt or to offer bonds and lower interest, then lets hope this access actually happens and allows DAL to capitalize on lower lower debt service.
We Labor, have our contract. A contract is a contract, and it does not become amendable until Dec 31, 2015. Take a few years to negotiate, and 1/3 of the list is gone. We agreed to it, we live by it. If anyone does not like it, get off your duff and step forward to lead. Leading always appears easier from behind.
There is no doubt we all want more, but we have what we agreed to. 68% said it was good enough. Lets not forget that. I want more, a lot more, but hoping never seems to work well.
05-11-2013, 03:21 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: 7ERA
Posts: 269
please tell me why that should matter one speck of flea sh!t to us.
we're blue collar labor. we're not upper management.
ALPA must, first and foremost, ensure that WE'RE taken care of. Not the executives, not the investors. That's someone else's problem. If ALPA can't grasp that fact, it's our own fault for letting them bargain for us.
It's time to face the facts.
-We settled on a concessionary contract when the company was wildly profitable.
-We will likely never have the negotiating capital we just squandered.
-Someone else is enjoying money that should be in our pockets.
-ALPA is NOT looking out for the line pilot.
we're blue collar labor. we're not upper management.
ALPA must, first and foremost, ensure that WE'RE taken care of. Not the executives, not the investors. That's someone else's problem. If ALPA can't grasp that fact, it's our own fault for letting them bargain for us.
It's time to face the facts.
-We settled on a concessionary contract when the company was wildly profitable.
-We will likely never have the negotiating capital we just squandered.
-Someone else is enjoying money that should be in our pockets.
-ALPA is NOT looking out for the line pilot.
Do you realize that to get the gains (restoration) that everyone wants, we need to be working for a company that is willing to not just agree to those raises, but support them. The RLA playbook was not written for labor. The next best thing for an airline and pilot group of our size, is to work for a company that tore up the old airline business model and wrote a new one. Investment grade is just another notch in that belt.
Look at the slides that were presented at that investor breakfast. A takeaway is a lot of extra cash in the business plan for "opportunities." Whatever those may be, will further solidify the new way of running an airline. Old ways need to be done away with. A company that is constantly profitable means gains every time we come to the table. Most importantly is sustain profitability means no give backs and no concessions.
Everyone on here touts SWA and their pilot bennies. Well what other company is considered "investment grade" and pays a dividend ?
It may not be where we the pilots want the money, but it does further our case to management when our time to talk comes. This announcement makes my expectations move higher not lower.
05-11-2013, 03:22 PM
Straight QOL, homie
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
Posts: 4,202
"Constructive engagement."
What's the end game?
The implication is that we just need to "hang in there" and "play ball" with management, and at some point we'll be "rewarded." We must let the company "pay down debt" and pursue "fleeting opportunities" so they can "right size" and "control costs" to "better compete." We should be OK with rushed negotiation timelines, because after all, "we'll get them next time."
Management bonuses skyrocket. ALPA continues to live in a world unaffected by our loss of earnings. Meanwhile, our own purchasing power falls further and further down the toilet.
Would some of the ALPA folks on here kindly define exactly what is the end game of "constructive engagement." When is the payoff?
What's the end game?
The implication is that we just need to "hang in there" and "play ball" with management, and at some point we'll be "rewarded." We must let the company "pay down debt" and pursue "fleeting opportunities" so they can "right size" and "control costs" to "better compete." We should be OK with rushed negotiation timelines, because after all, "we'll get them next time."
Management bonuses skyrocket. ALPA continues to live in a world unaffected by our loss of earnings. Meanwhile, our own purchasing power falls further and further down the toilet.
Would some of the ALPA folks on here kindly define exactly what is the end game of "constructive engagement." When is the payoff?
05-11-2013, 03:23 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: 7ERA
Posts: 269
Well stated Carl.
Giving cash to investors reduces the capital in the business.
If there were any way to turn that money into MORE MONEY, then that way would be better than throwing cash out the window.
If you will recall, Leo Mullin did a big stock buy back. The value of those shares were eventually nothing. A complete and absolute waste of money.
As labor, my preferred use for cash is growing the business in a profitable and sustainable way. The dividend is a sign we are out of ideas.
Giving cash to investors reduces the capital in the business.
If there were any way to turn that money into MORE MONEY, then that way would be better than throwing cash out the window.
If you will recall, Leo Mullin did a big stock buy back. The value of those shares were eventually nothing. A complete and absolute waste of money.
As labor, my preferred use for cash is growing the business in a profitable and sustainable way. The dividend is a sign we are out of ideas.
Don't disagree but do not forget that CAPex is still 2-2.5 bln per year, and there is extra fluff in the business plan. That allows what you desire.
Also this does not appear to be the stock buyback plan of Leo's era.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
