Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
09-23-2010, 02:32 PM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Number six was not mine, but I did agree with it. TANSAFL penned that one. 
Also a few others are not quite right, but you are correct in the fact that I like to use analogies.
Also a few others are not quite right, but you are correct in the fact that I like to use analogies.
09-23-2010, 02:35 PM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
09-23-2010, 02:46 PM
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
I do not think that is why they are pay attention. They are watching to see if the relationship sours. Pilots that are playing along mean an airline that can make money. (Ref AMR's Q3 guidance)
I beleive that in is a good thing that we are engaged with our company and the financial world. I think that it is important on many levels. I also know that taking that away will not go unnoticed and will negatively effect the outlook of our company. So, yes, I think it will "help" us in the effort of restoration, but I also know that a successful corporation that can turn a min of 7-8% margins quarter over quarter helps too. No single item will solve all of the ills of this profession, but they will aid in it its progress.
I beleive that in is a good thing that we are engaged with our company and the financial world. I think that it is important on many levels. I also know that taking that away will not go unnoticed and will negatively effect the outlook of our company. So, yes, I think it will "help" us in the effort of restoration, but I also know that a successful corporation that can turn a min of 7-8% margins quarter over quarter helps too. No single item will solve all of the ills of this profession, but they will aid in it its progress.
Personally, from what I've seen from DALPA, I'll be surprised if our opener has much more than a 20% increase in pay, hold the line on scope (with no improvements to it), and a few work rule improvements. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm beginning to think it's too much of a risk to wait around to find out.
09-23-2010, 02:55 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Position: 764 FO
Posts: 228
09-23-2010, 03:05 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: A-320/A
Posts: 588
OK all you (former) fighter jocks.....see if this isn't absolutely the best wingman story you've heard. I know it's thread drift, but a nice diversion while we await the position entitlement awards. Enjoy.
Chuck
http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/mi...war-story.html
Chuck
http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/mi...war-story.html
Last edited by chuck416; 09-23-2010 at 05:49 PM.
09-23-2010, 04:07 PM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
So you honestly think DALPA will "switch gears" as soon as we get into Section 6 negotiations and put an opener that would be full restoration or even anything approaching it? After everything DALPA has said and done for the past 5 years would indicate that we as a pilot group think we're doing pretty good under the circumstances? And then there's the problem of a pilot group, many of whom have had their expectations managed significantly downward. Where do you think the unity and resolve for restoration are going to suddenly come from? Where's the mission to rally around?
Personally, from what I've seen from DALPA, I'll be surprised if our opener has much more than a 20% increase in pay, hold the line on scope (with no improvements to it), and a few work rule improvements. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm beginning to think it's too much of a risk to wait around to find out.
Personally, from what I've seen from DALPA, I'll be surprised if our opener has much more than a 20% increase in pay, hold the line on scope (with no improvements to it), and a few work rule improvements. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm beginning to think it's too much of a risk to wait around to find out.
No I do not think that it is anyone's plan to go in and start off that way. It will assure you at least four to five years at the table. What we have is an opener depends on what happens at UAUA, and AMR before we open. You cannot make an assumption over 12 months out with so many variables in the air.
In regard to walking in and all of a sudden stopping collective engagement off the bat. Well if that is the plan, why the heck would we even be working on engaging the other side? We might as well just take pot shots every day for nothing more than a good laugh or two. I know that if the tables were turned that is one sure fire way to get me to be quite stubborn in a contractually mandated negotiation.
That whole idea fails logic to me.
As for what we will ask or what you think the min will be. Do not presuppose an outcome, not yet.
09-23-2010, 04:30 PM
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
No I do not think that it is anyone's plan to go in and start off that way. It will assure you at least four to five years at the table. What we have is an opener depends on what happens at UAUA, and AMR before we open. You cannot make an assumption over 12 months out with so many variables in the air.
In regard to walking in and all of a sudden stopping collective engagement off the bat. Well if that is the plan, why the heck would we even be working on engaging the other side? We might as well just take pot shots every day for nothing more than a good laugh or two. I know that if the tables were turned that is one sure fire way to get me to be quite stubborn in a contractually mandated negotiation.
That whole idea fails logic to me.
As for what we will ask or what you think the min will be. Do not presuppose an outcome, not yet.
In regard to walking in and all of a sudden stopping collective engagement off the bat. Well if that is the plan, why the heck would we even be working on engaging the other side? We might as well just take pot shots every day for nothing more than a good laugh or two. I know that if the tables were turned that is one sure fire way to get me to be quite stubborn in a contractually mandated negotiation.
That whole idea fails logic to me.
As for what we will ask or what you think the min will be. Do not presuppose an outcome, not yet.
1. The math just doesn't work. If our goal is restoration, small increases every 3 or 4 years just doesn't get us there. It would be completely different if we weren't starting from such a deep hole and there was no such thing as inflation. But it is what it is, and the math doesn't work. Either restoration is our goal or it is not. From the posture of this MEC and the lack of any stated objective with regards to this, it appears that our goal is something significantly short of restoration.
2. If our goal is restoration, then we have no clear mission stated. It's management 101 stuff. You cannot have success as a company or organization without a clearly stated, compelling mission statement around which your people can rally and focus their efforts.
3. We can be assertive, respectful, professional, and firm without being abrasive and combative. I don't think anyone is advocating all out nuclear war against management. (I'm certainly not.) That is a good way to screw up a company... our company! But we have sent so many wrong signals with regards to our intentions over the past several years. Management's expectations are not anywhere near where they need to be if we are to make any significant progress towards restoration and neither are the expectations of our pilot group in general. In the war of perception and expectations, they have us exactly where they want us... defeated from the start.
4. Our "relationship" with management appears to be a sham. The mutual respect is not there... as evidenced by the fact that they are perfectly happy to have us suffer along with BK/emergency wages 5 years after the company is out of BK and now making record profits. I think "proactive engagement" is absolutely the way things should be, but it takes respect on both sides. It has to be used in an appropriate circumstance. Without that mutual respect, then one side just gets taken advantage of.
09-23-2010, 04:36 PM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
09-23-2010, 04:48 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: bartender
Posts: 295
Several problems with what you are advocating:
1. The math just doesn't work. If our goal is restoration, small increases every 3 or 4 years just doesn't get us there. It would be completely different if we weren't starting from such a deep hole and there was no such thing as inflation. But it is what it is, and the math doesn't work. Either restoration is our goal or it is not. From the posture of this MEC and the lack of any stated objective with regards to this, it appears that our goal is something significantly short of restoration.
2. If our goal is restoration, then we have no clear mission stated. It's management 101 stuff. You cannot have success as a company or organization without a clearly stated, compelling mission statement around which your people can rally and focus their efforts.
3. We can be assertive, respectful, professional, and firm without being abrasive and combative. I don't think anyone is advocating all out nuclear war against management. (I'm certainly not.) That is a good way to screw up a company... our company! But we have sent so many wrong signals with regards to our intentions over the past several years. Management's expectations are not anywhere near where they need to be if we are to make any significant progress towards restoration and neither are the expectations of our pilot group in general. In the war of perception and expectations, they have us exactly where they want us... defeated from the start.
4. Our "relationship" with management appears to be a sham. The mutual respect is not there... as evidenced by the fact that they are perfectly happy to have us suffer along with BK/emergency wages 5 years after the company is out of BK and now making record profits. I think "proactive engagement" is absolutely the way things should be, but it takes respect on both sides. It has to be used in an appropriate circumstance. Without that mutual respect, then one side just gets taken advantage of.
1. The math just doesn't work. If our goal is restoration, small increases every 3 or 4 years just doesn't get us there. It would be completely different if we weren't starting from such a deep hole and there was no such thing as inflation. But it is what it is, and the math doesn't work. Either restoration is our goal or it is not. From the posture of this MEC and the lack of any stated objective with regards to this, it appears that our goal is something significantly short of restoration.
2. If our goal is restoration, then we have no clear mission stated. It's management 101 stuff. You cannot have success as a company or organization without a clearly stated, compelling mission statement around which your people can rally and focus their efforts.
3. We can be assertive, respectful, professional, and firm without being abrasive and combative. I don't think anyone is advocating all out nuclear war against management. (I'm certainly not.) That is a good way to screw up a company... our company! But we have sent so many wrong signals with regards to our intentions over the past several years. Management's expectations are not anywhere near where they need to be if we are to make any significant progress towards restoration and neither are the expectations of our pilot group in general. In the war of perception and expectations, they have us exactly where they want us... defeated from the start.
4. Our "relationship" with management appears to be a sham. The mutual respect is not there... as evidenced by the fact that they are perfectly happy to have us suffer along with BK/emergency wages 5 years after the company is out of BK and now making record profits. I think "proactive engagement" is absolutely the way things should be, but it takes respect on both sides. It has to be used in an appropriate circumstance. Without that mutual respect, then one side just gets taken advantage of.
09-23-2010, 05:17 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: 7ERA
Posts: 1,231
What kind of improvements do you want to scope?
We may be able to tighten up the language. Make it 100% certain about the number of 70/76 seat RJs. But we will never take back an airplane that has been outsourced.
If you expect that we will, you are setting yourself up for a big letdown.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
