Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
01-30-2010, 11:38 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: LAX ERA
Posts: 3,457
Now I have to go find what I'm thinking about........I remember something from a labor relations class as an undergrad.
Oh well, I love getting old
01-30-2010, 11:43 AM
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
You go Ferd! 
That puts our 73NA's at 206 or whatever the SWA 12 yr A makes. It makes the A's of the 73N on parity. I also put some numbers out there last night with 23-5-5-5-5 for the 744/777 rates. It ends with a 12 yr rate at about 337 an hr if I remember correctly. (2018 if you get a contract on 01.01.2013 or the day after ours expires) Dreaming I know
So as I stated earlier 320 an hr was our 777A rate in 2004 we would hit that between 2015-2016 so about 12 years to make the same hourly rate not adjusted for inflation.
That puts our 73NA's at 206 or whatever the SWA 12 yr A makes. It makes the A's of the 73N on parity. I also put some numbers out there last night with 23-5-5-5-5 for the 744/777 rates. It ends with a 12 yr rate at about 337 an hr if I remember correctly. (2018 if you get a contract on 01.01.2013 or the day after ours expires) Dreaming I know
So as I stated earlier 320 an hr was our 777A rate in 2004 we would hit that between 2015-2016 so about 12 years to make the same hourly rate not adjusted for inflation.
Carl
01-30-2010, 11:45 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Carl at about 2.5 billion a year our costs are about 9% of the revenue intake a year. That is in today's environment. I do not have the data in front of me to state what they were in 2004, but suffice to say they were probably a lot higher.
Huge, No, but a fairly fixed cost over the life of a contract.It was not what put us there. I agree with that, it was just the last big expense that the current leadership signed on to before the dam broke.
Our biggest problem IMO is that we as pilots and type A ppl think we play a bigger role at time than we do. That is both good and bad.
Huge, No, but a fairly fixed cost over the life of a contract.It was not what put us there. I agree with that, it was just the last big expense that the current leadership signed on to before the dam broke.
Our biggest problem IMO is that we as pilots and type A ppl think we play a bigger role at time than we do. That is both good and bad.
01-30-2010, 11:55 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Posts: 917
I'll have to wave the BS flag on the greenslip vs time and a half thing till someone shows me some numbers. It looks to me like the only guys who can take advantage of greenslips are guys who live in base. I would think the company would want more guys able to take those type of trips as needed?
If they did do 80hr for time and a half the junior line holders would get screwed. As it stands green slips, although easier for non commuters, are given out in seniority order to those with the lowest number of awarded green slips for the month. So if a senior bubba already received a GS for the month and I am on the list for one that day (and I'm legal for it) I get it ahead of the senior pilot.
Having never been under the fnwa method I don't know if junior folk got any love from the 80 for time and half, but I know I get it frequently here now, even on reserve!
Cheers
01-30-2010, 11:58 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: Kickin’ Back
Posts: 6,971
Denny;
It is important to debate the points here and on other forums. Many of the "Silent Majority" read this stuff to form an opinion. Arguing both side of an issue is good for the gander.
Carl; We are on the same page more or less.
A few pages back I did the math for a SWA parity rate on our 737's versus their. It was a 23 percent raise off of this year. Though the math is not perfect each percent is about 18 million and goes up as you compound the raises on each other.
Ergo:
To reach parity we would need a 414 million dollar increase per year to our cost. ( Probably 500 million as we do the math for are larger jets)
That equates to about 1.5% of our revenue this year. Doable IMO.
I also would not be surprised to see us morph to a 40 billion dollar a year corp as the world economy turns.
It is important to debate the points here and on other forums. Many of the "Silent Majority" read this stuff to form an opinion. Arguing both side of an issue is good for the gander.
Carl; We are on the same page more or less.
A few pages back I did the math for a SWA parity rate on our 737's versus their. It was a 23 percent raise off of this year. Though the math is not perfect each percent is about 18 million and goes up as you compound the raises on each other.
Ergo:
To reach parity we would need a 414 million dollar increase per year to our cost. ( Probably 500 million as we do the math for are larger jets)
That equates to about 1.5% of our revenue this year. Doable IMO.
I also would not be surprised to see us morph to a 40 billion dollar a year corp as the world economy turns.
I'm not trying to squash debate at all on this or any other forum. Debate is healthy and can lead to new ideas etc. For myself, I learned loooooong ago that, for the most part, I am not a very good debater. (I've got older siblings that are much better at it than me!!!
) I get emotionally involved (pi$$ed off) and when that happens I can't think straight!! So I tend to avoid putting myself in a situation where this might happen. Hence my reluctance to enter debate. Plus I'm just not that smart!!!! Some of the stuff I see you guys post on here just goes so far above my head it's not even funny!!Denny
01-30-2010, 12:05 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
I agree.
It seems to me that even though the merger is pretty much done, the pilot groups are still feeling each other out. Sure, we have a seniority list, the same uniforms, and soon we will be flying in the same cockpits (can I say that now at Delta?) But, we as a group have not "gone to battle" together yet and we don't know how we will behave when that time comes.
I get the feeling that some South brothers are worried that we in the North will shut the airline down if we don't get the crew meals we want. (Pink Floyd in LAS)
And on the other side, some North guys worry that some of our South brothers are a little too sympathetic to the management cause and wouldn't strike if management insisted that we fuel the aircraft out of our own bank accounts.
I'm sure neither is the case and it is all just a matter of perception and us not knowing each other. It does appear that, in general, we have a different mindset. Most North guys are spring loaded to fight because of the long history of mistreatment and combative style relationship we had with management. (After the company saving bankruptcy contract in the early 90's, management fought us for a 3% snap back.) It's doesn't seem that the South guys have had the same type of relationship with management, so some of you seem to be willing to give management the benefit of the doubt in any and everything.
At this point, I don't know which way is warranted. Under this new DAL management, there are many things that have occured with the merger that have been great. (stepping in to stop displacements, hotel rooms for IROP's in base, ect). But, other things raise my eyebrow (required vaccines, fear of management retaliation for webboard postings, or as someone put it, "they can effect outcomes.")
I know a healthy and profitable Delta makes it more likely that we as employees with reap the benefits. But, management has a fiducuary duty to make DAL as profitable as possible. Because of that duty, their goals can never entirely be aligned with the goals of our pilot group. They dirverge somewhere around the point where we want that extra dollar for reparations and they want to keep it for investment.
One thing I can say is that during the SLI, while it looked to me like we up north in some ways were disjointed in our public opinions, South guys seemed to be 100% on the same page. So, in my mind, I can see where we will all be sreaming and hollering the same thing with the time comes. Or, at least I hope so. I really hope we continue to use this forum to understand each other. It can only help us in the long run.
New K
01-30-2010, 12:12 PM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Not to be a downer on this dreary Saturday....but the first class they are putting in the 700's has nothing to do with the furlough clause right? So that means the company sees a bigger value in a first class than having those extra 4-6 seats as a completely coach a/c.
So something happens and DAL furloughs, they don't have to change a thing with these new 70's w/first class. They have to reduce the 6 seats in some of the fleet, but is it required to be the FC seats or could they just make it like these new 70's w/FC?
I'm trying to be a glass half full guy here, but as things get played out I can see the setting up for furloughs......IF there were to be a change in the economy/war/late night tv host etc. The company is getting set up so a furlough will create as little disturbance to the traveling public as possible.
So something happens and DAL furloughs, they don't have to change a thing with these new 70's w/first class. They have to reduce the 6 seats in some of the fleet, but is it required to be the FC seats or could they just make it like these new 70's w/FC?
I'm trying to be a glass half full guy here, but as things get played out I can see the setting up for furloughs......IF there were to be a change in the economy/war/late night tv host etc. The company is getting set up so a furlough will create as little disturbance to the traveling public as possible.
How can you come to the conclusion that DAL is setting up for furlough by converting 70 seat all coach 700's to 66 seat 2 class 700's??
The company has publicly stated that 2010 is the year of the customer. Customers have publicly stated they HATE RJs. One way to make RJs less miserable is to have FC available. This is also better for our premium customers. I don't see how this is setting up for furloughs.
Last edited by johnso29; 01-30-2010 at 12:40 PM.
01-30-2010, 12:14 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: Kickin’ Back
Posts: 6,971
There has been a lot of talk about trying to open contract negotiations early and maybe for the necessity of mediation. I just thought I'd post the relavent (sp?) section of the contract to add to the mix. Here it is:
Effective Date and Duration
Except as expressly provided otherwise, this agreement will become effective on October 30, 2008, will continue in full force and effect through December 31, 2012, and will renew itself without change through each succeeding December 31st, unless written notice of intended change is served in accordance with Section 6, Title I, of the Railway Labor Act, as
amended, by either party hereto at least 60 days but no more than 270 days prior to December 31, 2012 or December 31st in any year thereafter. In the absence of an agreement by March 31, 2013, the parties agree to jointly petition the National Mediation Board for mediation services.
Notice both sides have already agreed to enter mediation 3 months after the amendable date.
Denny
Effective Date and Duration
Except as expressly provided otherwise, this agreement will become effective on October 30, 2008, will continue in full force and effect through December 31, 2012, and will renew itself without change through each succeeding December 31st, unless written notice of intended change is served in accordance with Section 6, Title I, of the Railway Labor Act, as
amended, by either party hereto at least 60 days but no more than 270 days prior to December 31, 2012 or December 31st in any year thereafter. In the absence of an agreement by March 31, 2013, the parties agree to jointly petition the National Mediation Board for mediation services.
Notice both sides have already agreed to enter mediation 3 months after the amendable date.
Denny
01-30-2010, 12:21 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Position: Nice while it lasted
Posts: 326
DL Jumpseats
Temporary topic change. I just booked my first DL jumpseat via iCrew. How do I know I actually got it? Nothing on the page says "you the man" after you hit submit. Also, being a commute-to-reserve kind of guy with a highly variable schedule, how do I cancel one if my schedule changes?
01-30-2010, 12:24 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: Kickin’ Back
Posts: 6,971
I agree.
It seems to me that even though the merger is pretty much done, the pilot groups are still feeling each other out. Sure, we have a seniority list, the same uniforms, and soon we will be flying in the same cockpits (can I say that now at Delta?) But, we as a group have not "gone to battle" together yet and we don't know how we will behave when that time comes.
I get the feeling that some South brothers are worried that we in the North will shut the airline down if we don't get the crew meals we want. (Pink Floyd in LAS)
And on the other side, some North guys worry that some of our South brothers are a little too sympathetic to the management cause and wouldn't strike if management insisted that we fuel the aircraft out of our own bank accounts.
I'm sure neither is the case and it is all just a matter of perception and us not knowing each other. It does appear that, in general, we have a different mindset. Most North guys are spring loaded to fight because of the long history of mistreatment and combative style relationship we had with management. (After the company saving bankruptcy contract in the early 90's, management fought us for a 3% snap back.) It's doesn't seem that the South guys have had the same type of relationship with management, so some of you seem to be willing to give management the benefit of the doubt in any and everything.
At this point, I don't know which way is warranted. Under this new DAL management, there are many things that have occured with the merger that have been great. (stepping in to stop displacements, hotel rooms for IROP's in base, ect). But, other things raise my eyebrow (required vaccines, fear of management retaliation for webboard postings, or as someone put it, "they can effect outcomes.")
I know a healthy and profitable Delta makes it more likely that we as employees with reap the benefits. But, management has a fiducuary duty to make DAL as profitable as possible. Because of that duty, their goals can never entirely be aligned with the goals of our pilot group. They dirverge somewhere around the point where we want that extra dollar for reparations and they want to keep it for investment.
One thing I can say is that during the SLI, while it looked to me like we up north in some ways were disjointed in our public opinions, South guys seemed to be 100% on the same page. So, in my mind, I can see where we will all be sreaming and hollering the same thing with the time comes. Or, at least I hope so. I really hope we continue to use this forum to understand each other. It can only help us in the long run.
New K
It seems to me that even though the merger is pretty much done, the pilot groups are still feeling each other out. Sure, we have a seniority list, the same uniforms, and soon we will be flying in the same cockpits (can I say that now at Delta?) But, we as a group have not "gone to battle" together yet and we don't know how we will behave when that time comes.
I get the feeling that some South brothers are worried that we in the North will shut the airline down if we don't get the crew meals we want. (Pink Floyd in LAS)
And on the other side, some North guys worry that some of our South brothers are a little too sympathetic to the management cause and wouldn't strike if management insisted that we fuel the aircraft out of our own bank accounts.
I'm sure neither is the case and it is all just a matter of perception and us not knowing each other. It does appear that, in general, we have a different mindset. Most North guys are spring loaded to fight because of the long history of mistreatment and combative style relationship we had with management. (After the company saving bankruptcy contract in the early 90's, management fought us for a 3% snap back.) It's doesn't seem that the South guys have had the same type of relationship with management, so some of you seem to be willing to give management the benefit of the doubt in any and everything.
At this point, I don't know which way is warranted. Under this new DAL management, there are many things that have occured with the merger that have been great. (stepping in to stop displacements, hotel rooms for IROP's in base, ect). But, other things raise my eyebrow (required vaccines, fear of management retaliation for webboard postings, or as someone put it, "they can effect outcomes.")
I know a healthy and profitable Delta makes it more likely that we as employees with reap the benefits. But, management has a fiducuary duty to make DAL as profitable as possible. Because of that duty, their goals can never entirely be aligned with the goals of our pilot group. They dirverge somewhere around the point where we want that extra dollar for reparations and they want to keep it for investment.
One thing I can say is that during the SLI, while it looked to me like we up north in some ways were disjointed in our public opinions, South guys seemed to be 100% on the same page. So, in my mind, I can see where we will all be sreaming and hollering the same thing with the time comes. Or, at least I hope so. I really hope we continue to use this forum to understand each other. It can only help us in the long run.
New K
I couldn't agree with you more on all points!! You are always going to have the "black and white" guys on the fringes while the majority of guys will see differing shades of gray(or grey?!
). Denny
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
