Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-29-2011, 07:21 AM
Runs with scissors
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,728
Yeah but...can we have "Unity" when we are all fighting over the same jobs? We are our own worst enemys when it comes to undercutting each other just to get the jobs. ALPA needs to fix that before any there will be any real Unity.
They could have done it back in 1978 when Deregulation came to the industry. Many experts said eventually the strong airlines would devour the weak, and there would be only 2 or 3 Major airlines left in the US. Well, it's taken 33 years, but it is slowly happening. And exactly what has ALPA done in those 33 years to prevent the dowhill slide in our pay and benefits as we race to grab the few jobs left?
They (WE) allowed the B scale to migrate from AA to ALPA. They (WE) allowed small feeder airlines who were flying small props. to grow into jets. Then larger jets. And still larger jets. They (WE) allowed international code sharing which is replacing some of our widebody flying.
This industry has always been up-down, no pun intended, and like Crandall of AA said a long time ago, it is always being led by it's Dumbest compettitor, willing to sell tickets at a loss, to get market share. But Management has always seen Pilots as a variable cost, to be minimized, which as lead to us undercutting each other at every opportunity, to "Grow" (or save) our own airline, at the expense of someone else's. We need to be a Fixed cost, like airframes, tires and fuel.
Now, how do we make that happen?
They could have done it back in 1978 when Deregulation came to the industry. Many experts said eventually the strong airlines would devour the weak, and there would be only 2 or 3 Major airlines left in the US. Well, it's taken 33 years, but it is slowly happening. And exactly what has ALPA done in those 33 years to prevent the dowhill slide in our pay and benefits as we race to grab the few jobs left?
They (WE) allowed the B scale to migrate from AA to ALPA. They (WE) allowed small feeder airlines who were flying small props. to grow into jets. Then larger jets. And still larger jets. They (WE) allowed international code sharing which is replacing some of our widebody flying.
This industry has always been up-down, no pun intended, and like Crandall of AA said a long time ago, it is always being led by it's Dumbest compettitor, willing to sell tickets at a loss, to get market share. But Management has always seen Pilots as a variable cost, to be minimized, which as lead to us undercutting each other at every opportunity, to "Grow" (or save) our own airline, at the expense of someone else's. We need to be a Fixed cost, like airframes, tires and fuel.
Now, how do we make that happen?
05-29-2011, 07:23 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 4,099
Disregard .... I found the information. Again thanks to anyone who is in the process of replying.
Last edited by KC10 FATboy; 05-29-2011 at 07:35 AM.
05-29-2011, 07:27 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,014
- Continue along our current course and experience scope erosion at every turn
- Mergers
- Grow a pair and demand our flying back. Be willing to strike over the issue and be willing to suffer whatever consequences result from the kind of illegal work stoppages that might be required.
Of these, the most palatable choice is mergers (which is what we do when the acquired carrier brings something to the table we want, ie NWA). We need to learn that "unity" means enduring the merger process even when it is unpopular too.
Our refusal to merge ASA, Comair, Compass, etc has resulted in thousands of Delta furloughs, thousands of jobs lost and competition for our remaining jobs.
To succeed we'd have to make the tough decision that unity trumps all.
I'd guess most Delta pilots think not merging Delta's acquired airlines was the right thing to do. As long as that prevailing political thought endures this profession does not stand a chance at restoring unity.
05-29-2011, 07:27 AM
Runs with scissors
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,728
from above: "You bring up a good point; though you do realize that any alternative will be a paycut for you, don't you? As a 777 Captain, going to longevity based pay, or flattening the payscales in anyway, is a paycut to you, while the smaller equipment sees a pay raise. I don't necessarily have a problem with that, but thought you might. "
How is that a pay cut to me?? If everyone else gets a raise, I'm happy. You may not believe this, but I spent a long time on the bottom and have never gotten over it, I hope I never will.
How is that a pay cut to me?? If everyone else gets a raise, I'm happy. You may not believe this, but I spent a long time on the bottom and have never gotten over it, I hope I never will.
05-29-2011, 07:35 AM
Runs with scissors
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,728
Three choices:
(1) Continue along our current course and experience scope erosion at every turn
(2) Mergers
(3) Grow a pair and demand our flying back. Be willing to strike over the issue and be willing to suffer whatever consequences result from the kind of illegal work stoppages that might be required.
Of these, the most palatable choice is mergers (which is what we do when the acquired carrier brings something to the table we want, ie NWA). We need to learn that "unity" means enduring the merger process even when it is unpopular too.
Our refusal to merge ASA, Comair, Compass, etc has resulted in thousands of Delta furloughs, thousands of jobs lost and competition for our remaining jobs.
To succeed we'd have to make the tough decision that unity trumps all.
I'd guess most Delta pilots think not merging Delta's acquired airlines was the right thing to do. As long as that prevailing political thought endures we can't win.
(1) Continue along our current course and experience scope erosion at every turn
(2) Mergers
(3) Grow a pair and demand our flying back. Be willing to strike over the issue and be willing to suffer whatever consequences result from the kind of illegal work stoppages that might be required.
Of these, the most palatable choice is mergers (which is what we do when the acquired carrier brings something to the table we want, ie NWA). We need to learn that "unity" means enduring the merger process even when it is unpopular too.
Our refusal to merge ASA, Comair, Compass, etc has resulted in thousands of Delta furloughs, thousands of jobs lost and competition for our remaining jobs.
To succeed we'd have to make the tough decision that unity trumps all.
I'd guess most Delta pilots think not merging Delta's acquired airlines was the right thing to do. As long as that prevailing political thought endures we can't win.
BB, I agree, and when DAL bought CA and ASA I was saying then, we need to get them onto our list, ASAP! I was told it was their own MEC's who said, "Date of Hire or NFW!" Well, nobody in the airline world has EVER gotten date of hire in a merger, Not Western, Not Pan Am, not NWA. They were bringing 50 seat RJ's to the party and wanted to be 767 Captains. Yeah, like that's going to happen! So I don't know how they thought it would, but their insistance on DOH killed their chances of ever getting onto our list.
On the Job Action idea, last time I was in the DALPA MEC office (March) I asked that very question, the answer I got was, "American tried that, a Judge ordered them to knock it off, and it cost their Pilots $42 Million..." so the DALPA answer is; not going to happen.
When United went bankrupt after 9-11 and lost their pensions, I said then, "We will be next. ALPA needs to call for a SOS until Congress changes the bankruptcy laws to prevent this..."
05-29-2011, 07:36 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,919
Let ME be clear. What you are proposing is that junior pilots get a 50% payraise in the next contract, and senior pilots get a 20% raise. Or whatever the numbers turn out to be. And that's your definition of what a "real union" would do, huh?
And let me guess, you just happen to be junior...
Seriously, I find it disappointing that the only people who seem to argue strongly for a position, are those who would benefit directly from it, all the while claiming a morally superior position and rationalizing it is the best for the pilot group as a whole. Some examples:
1. Old guys arguing that retirement dollars are the most important.
2. Junior guys arguing that scope is the most important.
3. Junior guys arguing we need to level payrates (see above).
4. Senior pilots in smaller equipment arguing for seniority based (rather than equipment based) pay.
5. All pilots in a smaller aircraft (MD88 and/or 767) asking for pay "banding" that would bring their pay up more than their peers (73N and 330/777 respectively).
6. Regional guys arguing for a merger just so they can get a DAL seniority number without an interview.
7. Bald guys arguing to keep the hat.
And the list goes on and on...
And let me guess, you just happen to be junior...
Seriously, I find it disappointing that the only people who seem to argue strongly for a position, are those who would benefit directly from it, all the while claiming a morally superior position and rationalizing it is the best for the pilot group as a whole. Some examples:
1. Old guys arguing that retirement dollars are the most important.
2. Junior guys arguing that scope is the most important.
3. Junior guys arguing we need to level payrates (see above).
4. Senior pilots in smaller equipment arguing for seniority based (rather than equipment based) pay.
5. All pilots in a smaller aircraft (MD88 and/or 767) asking for pay "banding" that would bring their pay up more than their peers (73N and 330/777 respectively).
6. Regional guys arguing for a merger just so they can get a DAL seniority number without an interview.
7. Bald guys arguing to keep the hat.
And the list goes on and on...
I don't think it is financially feasible to offer a higher pay raise to junior pilots in contrast to senior ones.
As a Junior guy, I won't patronize and preach about how much I've sacrificed and given up under the current contract. Truth is, I wouldn't have a job or DAL seniority number if it wasn't for the sacrifices senior pilots ahead of me made to keep this company in business. I try and keep myself grounded with that fact whenever I talk about our contract and representation.
My statement about pilots being our own worst enemies is an ongoing truth, and I agree with all of your number points. We pretend to take an unbiased approach when discussing contractual changes improvements, but our actions have been anything but this.
I'm not saying that I am willing to give away scope and take a pay cut to appease our senior pilots, but I do feel our senior pilots are entitled to a little more given the sacrifices they have made over the past ten years.
I do think we as a group need to move forward together as a whole, and not pit one side against the other regardless of the issue.
05-29-2011, 07:39 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
I've got one correction I want to make to your excellent post. It's this part......
I can't count the number of times that we have pulled in next to an RJ that is going to a major city that used to be flown exclusively by mainline.. While we would be going to Jackson, MS, the 70 seater next to us would be headed off to Newark. Once, as we pulled in to the C gates in MSP, I looked down the row and saw where the aircraft were going:
The 73N was going to MKE
The M88 was going to BDL
The 70 seat RJ was going to PHL.
There used to be a time when RJ flying out of a hub didn't take them to big cities like PHL, BOS, EWR, LGA, BWI, DCA, etc. Now, they fly everywhere.
Apparently, it's the aircraft that ALPA somehow thinks is undesirable for major airline flying.
It seems that each contract they present us with contains a further erosion of our right to fly the smaller (not really that small) aircraft. It has got to stop.
05-29-2011, 07:48 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,014
BB, I agree, and when DAL bought CA and ASA I was saying then, we need to get them onto our list, ASAP! I was told it was their own MEC's who said, "Date of Hire or NFW!" Well, nobody in the airline world has EVER gotten date of hire in a merger, Not Western, Not Pan Am, not NWA. They were bringing 50 seat RJ's to the party and wanted to be 767 Captains. Yeah, like that's going to happen! So I don't know how they thought they would, but their insistance on DOH killed their chances of ever getting onto our list.
On the Job Action idea, last time I was in the DALPA MEC office (March) I asked that very question, the answer I got was, "American tried that and it cost their Pilots $42 Million..." so the DALPA answer is, not going to happen.
On the Job Action idea, last time I was in the DALPA MEC office (March) I asked that very question, the answer I got was, "American tried that and it cost their Pilots $42 Million..." so the DALPA answer is, not going to happen.
Merger policy at that time stipulated that a decision was made whether to have a merger before getting into SLI openers. Since there was never a decision to have a merger, SLI openers were never presented.
The policy makes sense. If unity is most important, then you don't want the merger sidelined due to a SLI squabble. Hence the commitment to the process before seeing the results of the process.
By paycheck, or equipment, any status quo merger with a DCI carrier would have been a staple.
There are always web board and crew room blow hards. They don't sit at the table and do not make policy.
In my opinion you were manipulated to get your opinion in line with the direction your leadership wanted you to go.
... and since it will come up I'll preemptive state, "Lawson was a jerk."
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 05-29-2011 at 08:04 AM.
05-29-2011, 07:58 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,014
The reasons for drawing the line had to do with pay and working conditions. The only way they could figure out how to discriminate was to base the line on aircraft, which was a very flawed decision since airplanes always grow in capacity and capability. It is also a easy limit to work around, as Republic has done with their "marketing certificates."
Inclusive scope would do away with the lines by simply stating "all Delta flying will be performed by Delta pilots." A compromise would be the joint venture language we have which covers the desirable flying. The most ineffective language is the exclusionary language which permits outsourcing of our undesirable flying.
A few years ago I was teaching some students about the differences in the T-38 C's electrical system when we were updating the A models and I said "and I think there's a flux capacitor in there somewhere".
Blank stares.
I ask "You guys know what a flux capacitor is, right?"
One kid raises his hand and says "Sir, its a term from physics when..."
I stopped him right there. Then I cried.
Blank stares.
I ask "You guys know what a flux capacitor is, right?"
One kid raises his hand and says "Sir, its a term from physics when..."
I stopped him right there. Then I cried.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 05-29-2011 at 08:14 AM.
05-29-2011, 08:03 AM
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2011
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 65
A few years ago I was teaching some students about the differences in the T-38 C's electrical system when we were updating the A models and I said "and I think there's a flux capacitor in there somewhere".
Blank stares.
I ask "You guys know what a flux capacitor is, right?"
One kid raises his hand and says "Sir, its a term from physics when..."
I stopped him right there. Then I cried.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
