Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
09-23-2010, 07:17 PM
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
Well lets play with this for a little bit. First a question that you can answer and I will answer first.
How long do you think it will take to negotiate a restoration pwa. (60-70% increase) IMHO at least five years. So with that assumption lets go from there.
Get a 20-30% raise on day one of a contract that takes less than a year to negotiate and is effective on Jan 1, 2013 or the amendable date. Add five percent a year for four year. (Same date you would at the earliest get a contract for a 40-70% gain)
So 30 yr 1, 35 yr 2, 40 yr 3, 45 yr four, over 2012 book rates. Now compile that money earned and compare it to what you will have made waiting for four to five years for a contract that may get to total restoration. Add in the extra retirement money along the way. Which one puts more money in your pocket?
Of course if you can force the company to give 100 percent restoration you will have 1) done something most associations have never done, and 2) The above example does not matter.
There are many ways to get to the same point in the same amount of time. It is the time value money approach. Just a thought and I am not suggesting anything. Just offering a counter point for the sake of discussion. You also would be back in section six again at the same point you would have been completing the first round.
How long do you think it will take to negotiate a restoration pwa. (60-70% increase) IMHO at least five years. So with that assumption lets go from there.
Get a 20-30% raise on day one of a contract that takes less than a year to negotiate and is effective on Jan 1, 2013 or the amendable date. Add five percent a year for four year. (Same date you would at the earliest get a contract for a 40-70% gain)
So 30 yr 1, 35 yr 2, 40 yr 3, 45 yr four, over 2012 book rates. Now compile that money earned and compare it to what you will have made waiting for four to five years for a contract that may get to total restoration. Add in the extra retirement money along the way. Which one puts more money in your pocket?
Of course if you can force the company to give 100 percent restoration you will have 1) done something most associations have never done, and 2) The above example does not matter.
There are many ways to get to the same point in the same amount of time. It is the time value money approach. Just a thought and I am not suggesting anything. Just offering a counter point for the sake of discussion. You also would be back in section six again at the same point you would have been completing the first round.
09-23-2010, 07:28 PM
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2010
Position: Car Number 9
Posts: 57
09-23-2010, 07:54 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,544
Those lawsuits were stupid regional pilots going at it alone. They had no chance from the start. What happens when management steps in and makes it full merger and not a take over of the flying? You know legally there is no difference between a merger of NWA/DAL to say DAL/SKW. Only that ALPA would be kicked out the door because it is bound by the same policy of mergers between carriers of all sizes. ALPA merger policy would put regional lifers above mainline pilots, this is the exact scenario ALPA can not have at any cost.
09-23-2010, 07:56 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,544
^^^^^^
ACL is 110% right here. I hope we have a new contract to vote on by Dec 31, 2012 that has a three year amendable date and a good chip out of the restoration block. Get another contract to vote on by Dec 31, 2015 that has another good chunk out of the block and an amendable date three years later. By 2018 we'll be back. I know it's a decade after it went away, but it took far longer than a decade to build up to C2K. If we go for too much, we'll still be fighting in 2015 working under the contract we have now.
ACL is 110% right here. I hope we have a new contract to vote on by Dec 31, 2012 that has a three year amendable date and a good chip out of the restoration block. Get another contract to vote on by Dec 31, 2015 that has another good chunk out of the block and an amendable date three years later. By 2018 we'll be back. I know it's a decade after it went away, but it took far longer than a decade to build up to C2K. If we go for too much, we'll still be fighting in 2015 working under the contract we have now.
09-23-2010, 08:01 PM
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
I'm not against that stratedgy. While we have to present a united front, I see no prudence in holding out 5+ years trying to play Dubinsky, Jr. I'm far more concerned with incremental scope reclamation than a one shot walk off grand slam whipper contract that will be instantly gutted the next downturn anyway, and would probably come at the expense of more scope relief in the first place.
Bingo. Else we come out looking like this again:
09-23-2010, 11:37 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: Kickin’ Back
Posts: 6,971
Those lawsuits were stupid regional pilots going at it alone. They had no chance from the start. What happens when management steps in and makes it full merger and not a take over of the flying? You know legally there is no difference between a merger of NWA/DAL to say DAL/SKW. Only that ALPA would be kicked out the door because it is bound by the same policy of mergers between carriers of all sizes. ALPA merger policy would put regional lifers above mainline pilots, this is the exact scenario ALPA can not have at any cost.
I think a "merger" between a ALPA regional carrier and DAL the above scenario would have a very slim chance of happening. If an agreement could not be reached between the two unions then it would go to arbitration just like the DAL/NWA merger did and look what happened. A list pretty much based on status and category (widebody CA, narrowbody CA, wide body FO, narrowbody FO). Since a regional guy never would have had access to larger equipment (career progression), the arbiter would have a hard time justifying merging them in with the overall list.
I've learned to never say never but I think it would be a stretch.
Denny
09-24-2010, 02:51 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 631
i don't think 20% day 1 will even match SWA rates. not to mention their 79 hour reserve guarantee. we shouldn't have to negotiate 1 hour to start from here....
09-24-2010, 03:02 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Position: Lowest Pay I Could Find
Posts: 1,044
If the only improvement we got was a rate increase, it would take about 40%.
09-24-2010, 04:10 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
This is a concept that is frequently misunderstood. I and others get accused of having an "all or nothing on the first day of the contract" mentality towards restoration. Nothing could be further from the truth. Something like the example you gave would work just fine. The compounding effect of a 30% increase up front, followed by 5% per year for 4 years makes very significant progress towards restoration. This is all I'm asking... that the contract achieves significant progress if not total restoration. Unfortunately, I don't get the impression that this is the direction being advocated by this MEC. They seem to be keeping expectations much lower than that. The Chairman's Letter from today is a good example as it makes it sound as if our pay is already restored.
Well 88, even a 20% as you say is settling give you a 40% bump plus the DC bumps over four years. You say that is selling out. I say that is double the first increases we got for the JPWA.
(JPWA (17%) + C2012 (40) ((20, 25, 30, 35, 40 at dos +4) or to put it another way:
JPWA about a 18.11% increase of the start rates + C2012 rates which is really at the end of the contract on the amendable date a 45.86% bump off of the JPWA rates.
In the end it equates to a 72.28% increase off of our CH 11 contract. That will give you total restoration by anyone's math on Jan 1 2017 using 20% as a starting point. Not even 30 or 40 percent.
Public Math is dangerous, as I have had no coffee this AM.
Using 100 dollars as your starting hourly rate that will give you a rate of 172.28 on Jan 1, 2017 the date this contract would be amendable given an assumption that we never went in to section six and had a PWA to vote on NLT than Nov 2012.
I am just trying to let you see that even under what you term the wost case scenario your rate, not buying power, will be at or better that of the coveted C2K rates.
Add to it that you do not have to wait four or five years to get it. Like I have been saying look at it check my public math and contemplate it. There are many way to skin a cat. I also know that the guys that may be retired by that time want money in their pocket now and this accomplishes their goal as well as yours.
09-24-2010, 04:18 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
I think a "merger" between a ALPA regional carrier and DAL the above scenario would have a very slim chance of happening. If an agreement could not be reached between the two unions then it would go to arbitration just like the DAL/NWA merger did and look what happened. A list pretty much based on status and category (widebody CA, narrowbody CA, wide body FO, narrowbody FO). Since a regional guy never would have had access to larger equipment (career progression), the arbiter would have a hard time justifying merging them in with the overall list.
I've learned to never say never but I think it would be a stretch.
Denny
I've learned to never say never but I think it would be a stretch.
Denny
We always see fences on big jets. Well you can have a fence on small jets. Think of the XJ flow but internally. As a RJ guy bids to a DAL jet that seat is open for a mainline pilot to bid down if they so choose. If a regional guy has no desire to fly your metal, is number one on their seniority list, something could be worked out that for the purpose of bidding rights you bid below them. They would also never have the opportunity to bid up. As guys retire this whole fence would go away. It allows those guys to feel some level of protection and know that they will never have to be your FO unless all the jets are parked and or they choose to.
How we integrate the seniority list is really not that unknown. Category status and past hiring practices will be used. I do not see too many guys shucking mainline careers out of choice to go to a regional. If a prenup like with nominal protections for these guys cannot be ironed out, I think it is safe to assume that the arbitrated award would be category status.
Also remember that the flying they perform really is our flying that we have agreed to be previously flown my non delta pilots. That point is important.
In reality no one agrees on the if so the how is merely conjure at this point.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
