Originally Posted by LeineLodge

1. It was clearly not a concessionary contract. You lose credibility when you say that. Argue with facts and you'll get further

2. Yes, the 12.5% does overcome the profit sharing. The profit sharing was monetized and accounts for about 2% of the entire 19.7ish % increase in compensation (notice I didn't say raise as some will quickly point out its a pay restoration for those that were here for the cuts, of which I am not one). This year is going to be close to "worst case" if you want to call it that, in that the company is going to be near $2B in profits. At 2.5B the company gains the max advantage of the monetization of profit sharing. The flip side, which will surely come someday is that even if delta doesn't make a penny, we still keep the part we monetized.

As an aside, there was talk of not having the 4 hour carve out for ADG. This likely would have resulted in the 73N categories closing in LAX, as the trips would have been credit heavy and Carmen would have seen fit to build the rotations from other bases. Better to have the carve out and maintain the LAX basing for our pilots? Or "show some spine" and end up with a bunch of displaced/commuting pilots?

Originally Posted by Purple Drank

It's one heck of a fantasy world at ALPA, where the company makes--and is forecast to improve upon--record profits; yet ALPA buys into the manufactured panic, and pushes a rushed concessionary contract.

It's better than fantasy for the company. It's beyond their wildest dreams.

p.s. does your 12.5% figure include the huge profit sharing chunk we gave up? Of course not.

Originally Posted by index

I don't understand your "argument is diluted" comment. To refresh your memory of what actually happened, the negotiations WERE rushed, and despite promises to the contrary, this haste affected the outcome. This would've been a fine contract---had DAL been losing money. We weren't though---quite the contrary---we were making RECORD profits, soon to be topped again THIS year.

Do you not recall that the company opened with a ZERO percent raise for us? Are you not the least bit insulted by that? What we ended up with is little more than our then existing rates adjusted for inflation. You may be satisfied with that, but I'm not.


March 9, 2012 Chairman’s Letter

“We believe opportunities exist—right now—to reach a comprehensive agreement on an expedited timeline, but let me make this point perfectly clear. While we will attempt to expedite the process, we will not compromise the product.” Tim O’Malley

March 13, 2012 Negotiator’s Notepad 12-01 (commenting on the above quote)

“We could not agree more. Under the continuing direction of the MEC, we will seek a comprehensive expedited agreement, but we will not sacrifice the quality of the agreement for the sake of expediency.”

Two months later after “intense negotiations” (as described in the above referenced Negotiator Notepad) we had a TA.

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar

push by the government to increase competition among air carriers to lower fares.

Originally Posted by LeineLodge

1. It was clearly not a concessionary contract. You lose credibility when you say that. Argue with facts and you'll get further

2. Yes, the 12.5% does overcome the profit sharing. The profit sharing was monetized and accounts for about 2% of the entire 19.7ish % increase in compensation (notice I didn't say raise as some will quickly point out its a pay restoration for those that were here for the cuts, of which I am not one). This year is going to be close to "worst case" if you want to call it that, in that the company is going to be near $2B in profits. At 2.5B the company gains the max advantage of the monetization of profit sharing. The flip side, which will surely come someday is that even if delta doesn't make a penny, we still keep the part we monetized.

As an aside, there was talk of not having the 4 hour carve out for ADG. This likely would have resulted in the 73N categories closing in LAX, as the trips would have been credit heavy and Carmen would have seen fit to build the rotations from other bases. Better to have the carve out and maintain the LAX basing for our pilots? Or "show some spine" and end up with a bunch of displaced/commuting pilots?

Originally Posted by Justdoinmyjob

I met Eva Mendes a few weeks ago...

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp

The contract wasn't concessionary overall, but a lot of concessions were made- way more than should have been. I consider it a poor and rushed final product after years of concessions and lost retirements. ADG is low enough as it is (should be 5:15 with no carve out), I seriously doubt they would have dumped LAX if it weren't for the carve out. That stuff was just saying yes to get a quick deal.

Oh well... been over this, we'll get em next time, right?

Originally Posted by upndsky

Anybody else having issues with Flighline/Easybid/Widgetworks? I tried to print out my trip sheets for tomorrow and kept getting an "http:/1.1 404 not found" error. Called the help line and was told it won't be fixed until the next bid period. Are you kidding me? This isn't the first time I've had tech support issues with them. I think they must still be using punch cards or something.

The big reason I subscribe to them is for the trip sheets. If they can't reliably support that, I don't see any reason to keep giving them my money.

Anyone know of any alternatives?

Originally Posted by Denny Crane

Ok, gonna take the conversation in a little different direction......

I'm thinking about finally entering the tablet era and getting an IPad by the end of the year. What's the difference between the IPad 2 and the IPad with "Retina Display?" Also, any recommendations on how much memory is really needed, 32 or 64 gig.

Thanks,

Denny