Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
07-11-2014, 03:57 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
07-11-2014, 04:30 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,299
Again. You're mischaracterizing the "hard liners." Almost nobody is as extreme as you're trying to make it sound.
It's really pretty simple. We took a draconian, unprecedented 42% cumulative pay cut. Plus, we lost our pension AND we had thousands of our jobs outsourced, resulting in almost a decade of some pretty bad stagnation. 10 years later, our current rates are a 34% pay cut in buying power. Talk about extreme! That's not "wallowing in self pity" or looking in the rear view mirror to the detriment of looking forward. It's just good old fashioned situational awareness.
So we're aware of the situation we're in. Where do we go from here? Do we basically give up, take restoration (or even anything close to it) off the table? Or do we set the objective to restore our profession and what's left of our careers? Do we build a plan around that objective? Or do we just fumble around with some vague mission statement about "improving" and be happy with whatever happens to fall into our laps?
Sure. Negotiations are always going to involve some give and take. But on the give and take ledger, we've done FAR more giving than taking. It's time to bring that ledger closer to being in balance. That's the perspective I have been advocating.
So there's that pesky situational awareness again... pretty basic math reminding us of exactly what it would take to balance the ledger. Are you going to advocate that DALPA adopt the objective of restoring balance to that ledger and hold them accountable for it? Or are you going to be satisfied with gains that in normal times would be considered pretty good but hardly make a dent in our situation... and forget about restoration? I think that is mostly where you and I differ.
It's really pretty simple. We took a draconian, unprecedented 42% cumulative pay cut. Plus, we lost our pension AND we had thousands of our jobs outsourced, resulting in almost a decade of some pretty bad stagnation. 10 years later, our current rates are a 34% pay cut in buying power. Talk about extreme! That's not "wallowing in self pity" or looking in the rear view mirror to the detriment of looking forward. It's just good old fashioned situational awareness.
So we're aware of the situation we're in. Where do we go from here? Do we basically give up, take restoration (or even anything close to it) off the table? Or do we set the objective to restore our profession and what's left of our careers? Do we build a plan around that objective? Or do we just fumble around with some vague mission statement about "improving" and be happy with whatever happens to fall into our laps?
Sure. Negotiations are always going to involve some give and take. But on the give and take ledger, we've done FAR more giving than taking. It's time to bring that ledger closer to being in balance. That's the perspective I have been advocating.
So there's that pesky situational awareness again... pretty basic math reminding us of exactly what it would take to balance the ledger. Are you going to advocate that DALPA adopt the objective of restoring balance to that ledger and hold them accountable for it? Or are you going to be satisfied with gains that in normal times would be considered pretty good but hardly make a dent in our situation... and forget about restoration? I think that is mostly where you and I differ.
07-11-2014, 04:39 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: "Prof" button manipulator
Posts: 1,685
Did he try Compass?
Point being, 9E is sealing their own fate with people like that on the interview selection board.
07-11-2014, 04:41 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: "Prof" button manipulator
Posts: 1,685
Hell no. Let them shoot themselves in the foot. Let's bring the flying back to mainline.
Pinnacle, carry on with the way you've been conducting interviews/business all along. 
07-11-2014, 05:17 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Permanently scarred
Posts: 1,707
07-11-2014, 05:53 AM
Bye Bye Maddog!
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Movin' On UP........
Posts: 560
Jeez! Finally some underboob!
All this fighting (almost) makes me want to go back to chit-chat!
Now.......How about some cute under-buns!
All this fighting (almost) makes me want to go back to chit-chat!
Now.......How about some cute under-buns!
07-11-2014, 05:53 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2012
Position: ATL 7ER A
Posts: 308
Again. You're mischaracterizing the "hard liners." Almost nobody is as extreme as you're trying to make it sound.
It's really pretty simple. We took a draconian, unprecedented 42% cumulative pay cut. Plus, we lost our pension AND we had thousands of our jobs outsourced, resulting in almost a decade of some pretty bad stagnation. 10 years later, our current rates are a 34% pay cut in buying power. Talk about extreme! That's not "wallowing in self pity" or looking in the rear view mirror to the detriment of looking forward. It's just good old fashioned situational awareness.
So we're aware of the situation we're in. Where do we go from here? Do we basically give up, take restoration (or even anything close to it) off the table? Or do we set the objective to restore our profession and what's left of our careers? Do we build a plan around that objective? Or do we just fumble around with some vague mission statement about "improving" and be happy with whatever happens to fall into our laps?
Sure. Negotiations are always going to involve some give and take. But on the give and take ledger, we've done FAR more giving than taking. It's time to bring that ledger closer to being in balance. That's the perspective I have been advocating.
So there's that pesky situational awareness again... pretty basic math reminding us of exactly what it would take to balance the ledger. Are you going to advocate that DALPA adopt the objective of restoring balance to that ledger and hold them accountable for it? Or are you going to be satisfied with gains that in normal times would be considered pretty good but hardly make a dent in our situation... and forget about restoration? I think that is mostly where you and I differ.
It's really pretty simple. We took a draconian, unprecedented 42% cumulative pay cut. Plus, we lost our pension AND we had thousands of our jobs outsourced, resulting in almost a decade of some pretty bad stagnation. 10 years later, our current rates are a 34% pay cut in buying power. Talk about extreme! That's not "wallowing in self pity" or looking in the rear view mirror to the detriment of looking forward. It's just good old fashioned situational awareness.
So we're aware of the situation we're in. Where do we go from here? Do we basically give up, take restoration (or even anything close to it) off the table? Or do we set the objective to restore our profession and what's left of our careers? Do we build a plan around that objective? Or do we just fumble around with some vague mission statement about "improving" and be happy with whatever happens to fall into our laps?
Sure. Negotiations are always going to involve some give and take. But on the give and take ledger, we've done FAR more giving than taking. It's time to bring that ledger closer to being in balance. That's the perspective I have been advocating.
So there's that pesky situational awareness again... pretty basic math reminding us of exactly what it would take to balance the ledger. Are you going to advocate that DALPA adopt the objective of restoring balance to that ledger and hold them accountable for it? Or are you going to be satisfied with gains that in normal times would be considered pretty good but hardly make a dent in our situation... and forget about restoration? I think that is mostly where you and I differ.
If you want wild appeals to pathos, I think your disappointment will persist. MD is pretty clear that he wants to get - another pilot-positive contract, two in a row during the same period of economic expansion, which just doesn't happen very often.
The problem with that "restoration" rhetoric you love so much is that no one outside of the twelve thousand Delta pilots gives a rat about what we gave up. The message has to be that we are an important strategic partner in Delta's success, and that we deserve to share in that success, with the RLA delineating the "or else" rather nicely.
Having read your posts for several years (on many forums, I believe), I doubt that it is possible for anyone to deliver a tentative agreement that you would publicly endorse. Despite the five and a half years I spent on furlough, I'm an incurable optimist, so I'll take one last chance on you.
I see two possible outcomes for the coming negotiations:
The first possibility is that DAL wants something changed (like sick leave or maybe seat lock), or maybe they actually want an efficient operation during some additional expansion combined with a tricky interval of retirements and hiring. I am firmly opposed to pay banding. They have a chance to have generally happy and productive pilots here while UAL and AMR are stuck in a briar patch. Early TA, with vanilla improvements to pay and time off. The end result is that Delta pilots are the highest paid in the industry.
The second possibility I envision is less rosy, a protracted fight defined by knucklehead moves on both sides of the table. In this case, it's a four-year drag defined by stonewalling and a lively game of chicken with hostages and probably another trip to see a judge. I think we would still end up with top rates, because MD knows how to run that sort of operation (based on his experience with C2K and helping Spirit run their successful strike). Despite the top rates, retro pay always comes up short.
We should steer for that first possibility, while it is viable, and make every effort to get every pilot informed and involved. Our unit cohesion in a year will be a big part of management's assessment of our potential. The 2012 contract survey only had FIFTY PERCENT participation.
That is pathetic, that basically tells the company that they can ignore the negotiators, because the pilots are ignoring the negotiators.
We need NINETY NINE percent if we are going to make the threat of Plan B actually stick.
07-11-2014, 06:01 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 5,016
That is an objective, not a strategy.
If you want wild appeals to pathos, I think your disappointment will persist. MD is pretty clear that he wants to get - another pilot-positive contract, two in a row during the same period of economic expansion, which just doesn't happen very often.
The problem with that "restoration" rhetoric you love so much is that no one outside of the twelve thousand Delta pilots gives a rat about what we gave up. The message has to be that we are an important strategic partner in Delta's success, and that we deserve to share in that success, with the RLA delineating the "or else" rather nicely.
Having read your posts for several years (on many forums, I believe), I doubt that it is possible for anyone to deliver a tentative agreement that you would publicly endorse. Despite the five and a half years I spent on furlough, I'm an incurable optimist, so I'll take one last chance on you.
I see two possible outcomes for the coming negotiations:
The first possibility is that DAL wants something changed (like sick leave or maybe seat lock), or maybe they actually want an efficient operation during some additional expansion combined with a tricky interval of retirements and hiring. I am firmly opposed to pay banding. They have a chance to have generally happy and productive pilots here while UAL and AMR are stuck in a briar patch. Early TA, with vanilla improvements to pay and time off. The end result is that Delta pilots are the highest paid in the industry.
The second possibility I envision is less rosy, a protracted fight defined by knucklehead moves on both sides of the table. In this case, it's a four-year drag defined by stonewalling and a lively game of chicken with hostages and probably another trip to see a judge. I think we would still end up with top rates, because MD knows how to run that sort of operation (based on his experience with C2K and helping Spirit run their successful strike). Despite the top rates, retro pay always comes up short.
We should steer for that first possibility, while it is viable, and make every effort to get every pilot informed and involved. Our unit cohesion in a year will be a big part of management's assessment of our potential. The 2012 contract survey only had FIFTY PERCENT participation.
That is pathetic, that basically tells the company that they can ignore the negotiators, because the pilots are ignoring the negotiators.
We need NINETY NINE percent if we are going to make the threat of Plan B actually stick.
If you want wild appeals to pathos, I think your disappointment will persist. MD is pretty clear that he wants to get - another pilot-positive contract, two in a row during the same period of economic expansion, which just doesn't happen very often.
The problem with that "restoration" rhetoric you love so much is that no one outside of the twelve thousand Delta pilots gives a rat about what we gave up. The message has to be that we are an important strategic partner in Delta's success, and that we deserve to share in that success, with the RLA delineating the "or else" rather nicely.
Having read your posts for several years (on many forums, I believe), I doubt that it is possible for anyone to deliver a tentative agreement that you would publicly endorse. Despite the five and a half years I spent on furlough, I'm an incurable optimist, so I'll take one last chance on you.
I see two possible outcomes for the coming negotiations:
The first possibility is that DAL wants something changed (like sick leave or maybe seat lock), or maybe they actually want an efficient operation during some additional expansion combined with a tricky interval of retirements and hiring. I am firmly opposed to pay banding. They have a chance to have generally happy and productive pilots here while UAL and AMR are stuck in a briar patch. Early TA, with vanilla improvements to pay and time off. The end result is that Delta pilots are the highest paid in the industry.
The second possibility I envision is less rosy, a protracted fight defined by knucklehead moves on both sides of the table. In this case, it's a four-year drag defined by stonewalling and a lively game of chicken with hostages and probably another trip to see a judge. I think we would still end up with top rates, because MD knows how to run that sort of operation (based on his experience with C2K and helping Spirit run their successful strike). Despite the top rates, retro pay always comes up short.
We should steer for that first possibility, while it is viable, and make every effort to get every pilot informed and involved. Our unit cohesion in a year will be a big part of management's assessment of our potential. The 2012 contract survey only had FIFTY PERCENT participation.
That is pathetic, that basically tells the company that they can ignore the negotiators, because the pilots are ignoring the negotiators.
We need NINETY NINE percent if we are going to make the threat of Plan B actually stick.
I'll bet survey participation is even lower this time. There are many pilots like myself who will never fill out one again. Why? I feel our union ignored the last survey and did what they thought was best for us. They came up woefully short on pay. Sold large rj scope, profit sharing, and work rules to get those small raises. I am voting no for next contract without even looking at it. I know it will be no where near my expectations. I learned that last contract.
07-11-2014, 06:11 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Again. You're mischaracterizing the "hard liners." Almost nobody is as extreme as you're trying to make it sound.
It's really pretty simple. We took a draconian, unprecedented 42% cumulative pay cut. Plus, we lost our pension AND we had thousands of our jobs outsourced, resulting in almost a decade of some pretty bad stagnation. 10 years later, our current rates are a 34% pay cut in buying power. Talk about extreme! That's not "wallowing in self pity" or looking in the rear view mirror to the detriment of looking forward. It's just good old fashioned situational awareness.
So we're aware of the situation we're in. Where do we go from here? Do we basically give up, take restoration (or even anything close to it) off the table? Or do we set the objective to restore our profession and what's left of our careers? Do we build a plan around that objective? Or do we just fumble around with some vague mission statement about "improving"and be happy with whatever happens to fall into our laps?
Sure. Negotiations are always going to involve some give and take. But on the give and take ledger, we've done FAR more giving than taking. It's time to bring that ledger closer to being in balance. That's the perspective I have been advocating.
So there's that pesky situational awareness again... pretty basic math reminding us of exactly what it would take to balance the ledger. Are you going to advocate that DALPA adopt the objective of restoring balance to that ledger and hold them accountable for it? Or are you going to be satisfied with gains that in normal times would be considered pretty good but hardly make a dent in our situation... and forget about restoration? I think that is mostly where you and I differ.
It's really pretty simple. We took a draconian, unprecedented 42% cumulative pay cut. Plus, we lost our pension AND we had thousands of our jobs outsourced, resulting in almost a decade of some pretty bad stagnation. 10 years later, our current rates are a 34% pay cut in buying power. Talk about extreme! That's not "wallowing in self pity" or looking in the rear view mirror to the detriment of looking forward. It's just good old fashioned situational awareness.
So we're aware of the situation we're in. Where do we go from here? Do we basically give up, take restoration (or even anything close to it) off the table? Or do we set the objective to restore our profession and what's left of our careers? Do we build a plan around that objective? Or do we just fumble around with some vague mission statement about "improving"and be happy with whatever happens to fall into our laps?
Sure. Negotiations are always going to involve some give and take. But on the give and take ledger, we've done FAR more giving than taking. It's time to bring that ledger closer to being in balance. That's the perspective I have been advocating.
So there's that pesky situational awareness again... pretty basic math reminding us of exactly what it would take to balance the ledger. Are you going to advocate that DALPA adopt the objective of restoring balance to that ledger and hold them accountable for it? Or are you going to be satisfied with gains that in normal times would be considered pretty good but hardly make a dent in our situation... and forget about restoration? I think that is mostly where you and I differ.
Lastly, what I find reeeeeeally interesting is your statement about "pretty basic math". Again... I will ask you how long you will be willing to wait for that restoration, because the TVM is a really basic mathematical concept. What is really ironic is that you are an advocate of restoration and as such talk about it in terms of the 34% degradation in buying power, yet you still seem to ignore it going forward. Tell ya what. Why don't you calculate what that buying power will be in the event we have to run the full course of Section 6 (and you can make an assumption about how long it will be before the NMB releases us.. I'll leave it up to you on that). And then do it under an assumption that we get parked for 2 or 3 years. I would actually be very interested to see that. How much more would we need then to achieve restoration?
07-11-2014, 06:19 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
I'll bet survey participation is even lower this time. There are many pilots like myself who will never fill out one again. Why? I feel our union ignored the last survey and did what they thought was best for us. They came up woefully short on pay. Sold large rj scope, profit sharing, and work rules to get those small raises. I am voting no for next contract without even looking at it. I know it will be no where near my expectations. I learned that last contract.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
