Details on Delta TA
07-02-2015, 08:40 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,184
We didn't "monitize" any prior to C12 to my knowledge. Not sure what you mean by concession though. This is not necessarily a concession, it is ust not a pay increase as it is being touted as being.
07-02-2015, 08:58 AM
Line Holder
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 27
Thought in 2011 for example we received 15% for 0-2.5B and 20% above 2.5B. With contract 2012 we reduced the 15% to 10% from 0-2.5B still 20% above 2.5B. If contract 2015 passes wonder if someone could compare and contrast total income with 2011 hourly wages and 2011 profit sharing metrics with 2015 or 2016 company profits and compare that to what our individual income would be with the new contract. (Curious how close our total income would be if kept old hourly rates and higher PS metrics compared to switching PS to hourly rates)
07-02-2015, 09:03 AM
Snake
Joined APC: May 2015
Posts: 242
There is no scenario where you make more money with our current deal than you would with the TA. The exchange is already better than 1:1, and it only gets better on a sliding scale down to $2.5 billion PTIX.
Did you have a good day today? Great! It's September tenth. Tomorrow might be September tenth, too, but someday it will be the eleventh, and at-risk income will get chunked up by some form of, you know, risk.
We sold all our profit sharing back to the company in 1999 for six percent across-the-board raises. It was an important step in setting the Delta Dot for the B777, and without that sale, the 2004 pay rates wouldn't even exist to provide the content for the pay rates in the TA.
07-02-2015, 09:09 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,184
Unless it is.
There is no scenario where you make more money with our current deal than you would with the TA. The exchange is already better than 1:1, and it only gets better on a sliding scale down to $2.5 billion PTIX.
Did you have a good day today? Great! It's September tenth. Tomorrow might be September tenth, too, but someday it will be the eleventh, and at-risk income will get chunked up by some form of, you know, risk.
We sold all our profit sharing back to the company in 1999 for six percent across-the-board raises. It was an important step in setting the Delta Dot for the B777, and without that sale, the 2004 pay rates wouldn't even exist to provide the content for the pay rates in the TA.
There is no scenario where you make more money with our current deal than you would with the TA. The exchange is already better than 1:1, and it only gets better on a sliding scale down to $2.5 billion PTIX.
Did you have a good day today? Great! It's September tenth. Tomorrow might be September tenth, too, but someday it will be the eleventh, and at-risk income will get chunked up by some form of, you know, risk.
We sold all our profit sharing back to the company in 1999 for six percent across-the-board raises. It was an important step in setting the Delta Dot for the B777, and without that sale, the 2004 pay rates wouldn't even exist to provide the content for the pay rates in the TA.
And I disagree that it is a pay increase because we WILL get profit sharing in 2016 and probably 2017 AND even 2018. Yes, we get more money, but we are -and I hate to use this phrase- self funding part of that increase. True, we will be making a lot more money under the TA. I have never said otherwise. The semantic argument is one I have a really hard time getting past.
As to your risk argument, it is one I am wiling to take since this is a 3 year deal. Ask yourself this question though: If we were only making $1.1 billion right now, would management still be willing to pay what they are paying for this same PS deal?
07-02-2015, 09:22 AM
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Our upcoming TA vote is unregulated
Well this definitely worrying. Here's a reprint from a friend who contacted the NLRB:
----------------
Ladies and Gentlemen,
First let me start by saying thank you to all that wanted to participate in the letter from the pilots to the Department of Labor. I apologize if you see the letter and your name was not included. The number of pilots wanting to be listed quickly grew over 1000, so I had to take just a sample of the pilots and include them in the letter.
THE SYSTEM OF VOTING USED BY ALPA IS NOT REGULATED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR!
I was briefed by an official at the National Labor Relations Board. She informed me that the NLRB has no established rules for internet voting when it come to contract negotiations. The only established rules are for the elections of union officers.
THIS MEANS THAT THERE IS NO OVERSIGHT IN THIS TA VOTE BECAUSE THERE ARE NO RULES THAT SAY THERE HAS TO BE OVERSIGHT!
There is no requirement to make sure that your vote was counted correctly. The resolutions passed by both council 44 and council 1, could be put into place immediately.
Not only did the officials at the NLRB tell me that our voting was unregulated, they also told me that they had a substantial issue with the voting system used by Ballot Point. My staff and I, were directed to a law suit that is pending against APA, in their use of Ballot Point in regards to recent election of officers. An election that occurred in April of 2014. Ballot Point is the very same vendor that we used in our last contract vote.
The issues that the NLRB had with Ballot Point and its use as a voting system are a violation of the Labor-Management Reporting Act of 1959, 29 U.S.C 481-484, Title IV of the Act.
I have included a copy of the filed law suit below. Keep in mind that these are filled charges and the law suit is still pending outcome.
The Allegations are:
1. The voting system stored member identifying information that would allow individuals to identify how the members voted.
2. The system allows union election administrators to remove the votes of voters that they determine to be ineligible after they have cast their votes!
3. The internet voting system did not permit an observer to effectively observe the election. Observers were able to view reports generated by the software, but observers were not able to verify that the votes were recorded and tallied correctly.
It is in my humble opinion that the reason that our union (ALPA) changed vendors was to distance themselves from the scrutiny of this law suit. Knowing the details of this filed law suit leads us to some questions.
If there are no rules regulating the system of voting for this TA, how do we know if the votes will be counted correctly?
If in that system the votes could be considered ineligible and removed, what is to stop election officials from removing your vote?
If there are no rules governing TA votes, why were the council 44 and council 1 resolutions not adopted immediately to give the pilots confidence that their votes are counted correctly?
I can not answer these questions for you. You will have to ask the elected union officials that contracted VoteNet, and those union officials that are responsible for bringing you the results of what will be the most important contract vote of your life!
This vote will determine whether bankruptcy wages are a permanent reset. This contract will tell you what the company and your union thinks of your dedication and sacrifice. We need to know that our votes are counted correctly.
It is your legal right protected by State and Federal Law to question your union.
In my opinion, I think that it is time that we get a system in place that gives every voter the confidence that their vote was counted correctly. I think that is time to ask our union why we don't already have one in place.
If our union can take 57 Million dollars a year from us, they can use our money to come up with a system that complies with the resolutions set forth by its members. Keep in mind that not having regulations on TA votes goes both ways.
THERE ARE NO REGULATIONS STOPPING OUR UNION FROM PUTTING THE SYSTEM OF VOTING REQUESTED IN THE VOTING RESOLUTIONS IN PLACE!
I think that it is time to call your reps and ask some questions! It is your right!
----------------
Carl
----------------
Ladies and Gentlemen,
First let me start by saying thank you to all that wanted to participate in the letter from the pilots to the Department of Labor. I apologize if you see the letter and your name was not included. The number of pilots wanting to be listed quickly grew over 1000, so I had to take just a sample of the pilots and include them in the letter.
THE SYSTEM OF VOTING USED BY ALPA IS NOT REGULATED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR!
I was briefed by an official at the National Labor Relations Board. She informed me that the NLRB has no established rules for internet voting when it come to contract negotiations. The only established rules are for the elections of union officers.
THIS MEANS THAT THERE IS NO OVERSIGHT IN THIS TA VOTE BECAUSE THERE ARE NO RULES THAT SAY THERE HAS TO BE OVERSIGHT!
There is no requirement to make sure that your vote was counted correctly. The resolutions passed by both council 44 and council 1, could be put into place immediately.
Not only did the officials at the NLRB tell me that our voting was unregulated, they also told me that they had a substantial issue with the voting system used by Ballot Point. My staff and I, were directed to a law suit that is pending against APA, in their use of Ballot Point in regards to recent election of officers. An election that occurred in April of 2014. Ballot Point is the very same vendor that we used in our last contract vote.
The issues that the NLRB had with Ballot Point and its use as a voting system are a violation of the Labor-Management Reporting Act of 1959, 29 U.S.C 481-484, Title IV of the Act.
I have included a copy of the filed law suit below. Keep in mind that these are filled charges and the law suit is still pending outcome.
The Allegations are:
1. The voting system stored member identifying information that would allow individuals to identify how the members voted.
2. The system allows union election administrators to remove the votes of voters that they determine to be ineligible after they have cast their votes!
3. The internet voting system did not permit an observer to effectively observe the election. Observers were able to view reports generated by the software, but observers were not able to verify that the votes were recorded and tallied correctly.
It is in my humble opinion that the reason that our union (ALPA) changed vendors was to distance themselves from the scrutiny of this law suit. Knowing the details of this filed law suit leads us to some questions.
If there are no rules regulating the system of voting for this TA, how do we know if the votes will be counted correctly?
If in that system the votes could be considered ineligible and removed, what is to stop election officials from removing your vote?
If there are no rules governing TA votes, why were the council 44 and council 1 resolutions not adopted immediately to give the pilots confidence that their votes are counted correctly?
I can not answer these questions for you. You will have to ask the elected union officials that contracted VoteNet, and those union officials that are responsible for bringing you the results of what will be the most important contract vote of your life!
This vote will determine whether bankruptcy wages are a permanent reset. This contract will tell you what the company and your union thinks of your dedication and sacrifice. We need to know that our votes are counted correctly.
It is your legal right protected by State and Federal Law to question your union.
In my opinion, I think that it is time that we get a system in place that gives every voter the confidence that their vote was counted correctly. I think that is time to ask our union why we don't already have one in place.
If our union can take 57 Million dollars a year from us, they can use our money to come up with a system that complies with the resolutions set forth by its members. Keep in mind that not having regulations on TA votes goes both ways.
THERE ARE NO REGULATIONS STOPPING OUR UNION FROM PUTTING THE SYSTEM OF VOTING REQUESTED IN THE VOTING RESOLUTIONS IN PLACE!
I think that it is time to call your reps and ask some questions! It is your right!
----------------
Carl
07-02-2015, 09:58 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Thought in 2011 for example we received 15% for 0-2.5B and 20% above 2.5B. With contract 2012 we reduced the 15% to 10% from 0-2.5B still 20% above 2.5B. If contract 2015 passes wonder if someone could compare and contrast total income with 2011 hourly wages and 2011 profit sharing metrics with 2015 or 2016 company profits and compare that to what our individual income would be with the new contract. (Curious how close our total income would be if kept old hourly rates and higher PS metrics compared to switching PS to hourly rates)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
