Originally Posted by NuGuy

It will be interesting to see what the FPL shows.

Any of the Councils can get the numbers anytime they want, because the data is also maintained by ALPA National. Reps could get the data with a phone call, post it on the crew room wall, and hand it out in flyers as pilots walk in, and it's all perfectly cool.

Instead, a reasonable effort has been made for the MEC to step up to do it themselves. We'll see if that happens.

Nu

Originally Posted by flamer

first, i don't think it's right that they are using dues money to buy any booze. but, i don't think anyone would have even noticed if they were actually getting results.

hell, i'll buy the keg for the first meeting following a solid scope plan, and compensation somewhere in the same galaxy as swa.

and i'm not sure why anyone on fpl should getting anything more than line per diem.

but, like i said, they brought this microscope to the fight due mostly to a lack of results. we (the avg dal pilot) are not in the habit of handing out free lunches when our per diem barely pays for our own.

Originally Posted by Scoop

Anyone else get called by Met Life in regard to DAL Life Insurance? They want me to name a beneficiary but I don't remember signing up for any Met Life products. Is this a scam or is it some type of legitimate minimal free life insurance that they provide?

Thanks Scoop

Originally Posted by Denny Crane

Could it be the life insurance from the D&S Plan that we all have to pay taxes on?

Denny

Originally Posted by hammer189

1) If LUV has a higher cost structure than us, how do they turn a profit when we don't? (I've been told by managers at Delta that SW has a higher cost structure. Also, its well known that they pay thier people more across the board.ie_Pilots, FA, Rampers) They have lower yields per ticket in revenue, don't collect a premium on First Class seats, and miss out on big money from bags. I'd like to see a list compiled of why they make money when we don't. And not something like: They don't have RJs or our VPs are paid more or they don't have Alpa. Something based purely in financial terms.

Somewhere is published the number of employees per airplane for all airlines.
SWA was around 36 and Delta was around 79 people per aircraft.
This is a huge reason that they have a cost advantage over us.
These numbers are old and from memory.
?

Originally Posted by dragon

Yes, It is. I received the same phone call and was able to do everything on line through their secure server. That should allay any fears of scamming.

Now to explain to the spousal unit, that I named "Tiffany" stage name, I think, as the beneficiary.

I KEED!

Originally Posted by Scoop

Anyone else get called by Met Life in regard to DAL Life Insurance? They want me to name a beneficiary but I don't remember signing up for any Met Life products. Is this a scam or is it some type of legitimate minimal free life insurance that they provide?

Thanks Scoop

Originally Posted by RawScoreZero

Its amazing that they have half the employees per airplane,yet manage to move their metal just as good or better than Delta and get higher scores for customer service.

In summary:
1) Fewer people to accomplish the same work. In every department.
2) Lower MX costs due to fleet simplification.
3) Lower training costs due to fleet simplification.
4) Lower Executive pay
5) Higher Daily utilization per plane.
6) Higher revenue by selling 80%+ tickets on thier own website.

Anything else?

Originally Posted by acl65pilot

A few things that make it easier for them but are not inclusive. 1) Less Debt load which equates to less debt service, or in layman's terms, less interest paid, 2) They work more block hrs per pilot than we do, and fly less credit. I suggest looking at the MIT Website website: Airline Data Project
and here is one that offers comparitive analysis:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...0Summary09.htm

Here is a direct wage one that shows the LUV pilots making more but you need to look at block per pilot as well:

http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...0PERSONNEL.htm

This one is a good start, because it gives equivalent pilots for equal block.
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...ity%202009.htm

Here is the block per pilot breakdown:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...er%20Month.htm

Passengers per pilot:

http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...Equivalent.htm

I will keep this simple as you just kicked the bee hive again!

ALPA could recapture the flying at the majors and represent the regional pilots interests. It requires the mainline pilots accepting that the regional ALPA members are part of their trade and when the flying is recaptured, they do not just step on their fellow ALPA brother or sister, but find a solution that benefits these pilots that is better than the street. In a word, Unity. If we all cannot see that, we are doomed from the start.

Originally Posted by acl65pilot

Sure here goes:

I understand the need for a place that has five or six conference rooms available. Watching the meetings first hand I understand the size and scope of what is involved, and it is no small task. The last Regular Meeting had 31 Reps, 4 Officers, 5-7 support staff, 3-4 lawyers, 4, negotiators, the chairman of almost every committee, a few line pilot on lookers, new reps (5) and a countless amount of other people that were giving presentations. You have drafting committees every day, and those are three to four rooms for the three to four breakout groups of Reps, you need an area to provide for lunch, and a main conference room that is wired for audio and visual, as well as lockable for closed session. You need to bring your own wi-fi capability, and wireless printing hardware and software for the admins to print the resolutions up to pass out so everyone has the same data in front of them to vote on, you need power outlets for at least 60 people to power their laptops in for 10 hrs a day, you need a place that the reps can focus on their issues of interest away from the very timed meeting day (hospitality suite) and you need rooms for all of the people that need em; probably close to 60 or so a night if it is not in Atlanta.

If it is a major meeting even the Atlanta personnel will stay a few nights as these things start at 0730 and run to well after six, then close to midnight discussing the way everyone is going to vote.

Point is that this is no junior league organization, and it does take a ton of money to run. I have always argued that we could do a little better in cost, but remember that many of those rates have internet, tax, food etc thrown in since we get comped this and that on some meetings.

Could we do better in the way of cost?, maybe but before we shot em, go ask what deals we got on the W last year. We got a killer rate because we booked a cancellation of a conference. We search for the deals. The food in the suite is average; hot dogs, burgers, etc, nothing fancy. Beer is free and there is a lot of that though.

I was floored at the cost of some of this stuff, but when I had it explained to be by our Tres, saw a bunch of meetings, witnessed our reps trying to save money not take money from the pilots, and overall acting very frugal, I began to understand that it is not an excess of a few, but the shear scope of our union's operation that costs money.

Yes, the hotel near the airport is generally a lot cheaper, but there are reasons to not have it there for a five or six day meeting. These places will also ding you on extra conference rooms etc, and when you tally all of that up, it get more expensive real quick. Also, the meetings at the airport in that report are generally one day special meetings that do not require anything but one room, reps rooms only and no meals and extra space that a long Regular Meeting does.

We can do better, but not to the level you think, they really do a good job at this. Maybe the crew hotels would be a good idea, but they would have to have four small conference rooms, and one large on for five days.

Originally Posted by Flamer

First, I don't think it's right that they are using dues money to buy any booze. But, I don't think anyone would have even noticed if they were actually getting results.

Hell, I'll buy the keg for the first meeting following a solid scope plan, and compensation somewhere in the same galaxy as SWA.

And I'm not sure why anyone on fpl should getting anything more than line per diem.

But, like I said, they brought this microscope to the fight due mostly to a lack of results. We (the avg dal pilot) are not in the habit of handing out free lunches when our per diem barely pays for our own.

Originally Posted by acl65pilot

A few things that make it easier for them but are not inclusive. 1) Less Debt load which equates to less debt service, or in layman's terms, less interest paid, 2) They work more block hrs per pilot than we do, and fly less credit. I suggest looking at the MIT Website website: Airline Data Project
and here is one that offers comparitive analysis:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...0Summary09.htm

Here is a direct wage one that shows the LUV pilots making more but you need to look at block per pilot as well:

http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...0PERSONNEL.htm

This one is a good start, because it gives equivalent pilots for equal block.
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...ity%202009.htm

Here is the block per pilot breakdown:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...er%20Month.htm

Passengers per pilot:

http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...Equivalent.htm

I will keep this simple as you just kicked the bee hive again!

ALPA could recapture the flying at the majors and represent the regional pilots interests. It requires the mainline pilots accepting that the regional ALPA members are part of their trade and when the flying is recaptured, they do not just step on their fellow ALPA brother or sister, but find a solution that benefits these pilots that is better than the street. In a word, Unity. If we all cannot see that, we are doomed from the start.