Search

Notices

Details on Delta TA

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-02-2014, 02:54 PM
  #1301  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Posts: 276
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
United does get 42 days of vacation however not until 26 years of service. Did you look at their pay rates years 1 to 3 compared with Delta. If they dropped your entire trip how many pay protected hours are you getting?
One day

UAL also gets the 35 days at year 12... And DAL is 28 days.
thefoxsays is offline  
Old 09-02-2014, 02:59 PM
  #1302  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,599
Default

Originally Posted by thefoxsays
One day

UAL also gets the 35 days at year 12... And DAL is 28 days.
Enjoy your day off with pay or pick something else up and double dip. Maybe a green slip and triple dip!
sailingfun is online now  
Old 09-02-2014, 05:44 PM
  #1303  
The Brown Dot +1
 
scambo1's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Default

Originally Posted by alfaromeo
Well, right back at you. Maybe you should go back and read some of what you have written in the past and see if you are just getting a taste of your own medicine here. My frustration is the continued hashing and rehashing of the same tired talking points, all completely invented. I guess your assertion that the reasoning behind the deal was all just a fairy tale meant to deliberately mislead the pilots is just nice guy talk? Don't dish it out if you can't take it.

The 717's were a good deal and so were the A-319's that they were looking at. The 717's were all or nothing so they had to find a way to unlock the financing and flying commitments on the 50 seaters in order to take the whole lot. If they couldn't get that, they would just take many fewer A-319's, keep a number of the 50 seaters, and let the 717's go elsewhere.

If the RJ-76's were not the key to unlocking the financing and flying commitments for the 50 seaters, then you must have some reason why all those third parties deliberately let Delta out of their contracts. Do you have an answer to that?

It shouldn't be too much to ask, that when you make definitive statements like "the 717's were coming anyway" that you have some logical explanation to back it up. You accuse me of lying about those aircraft and then get all touchy feely when it comes back at you.
It has been established by the company in various written and verbal pieces that the 717s were too good to pass up, cost swa over a billion to sell them to us, etc. this is with the benefit of hindsight that I definitively say today that the 717s were coming...the company was going to find a way to get them here.

It is somehow your contention that we pilots were the lynchpin in this financing scheme...not ever going to believe that...ever.
scambo1 is offline  
Old 09-02-2014, 05:47 PM
  #1304  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by alfaromeo
Here we have another instance of made up propaganda...

...I see you have dredged up the same webboard talking points again, so we will try one more time to see if you can make an honest answer to a direct question....
That dude is a real people person ain't he.

Originally Posted by alfaromeo
If the 717's were going to come anyway, then why in the hell did management give us $1 billion 6 months early in order to get them?
Easy, and this is at least the tenth time I've told you this. They didn't give us $1 billion. You guys have made that number up out of whole cloth by adding gains without accounting for losses. Management has consistently described our contract as "cost neutral." But then they went further by stating: "The additional savings realized from the pilot's contract will allow us to fund initiatives for the benefit of other Delta employees." Then they followed through by recently announcing that all employees at Delta have been returned to their pre-bankruptcy wages...except the pilots.

There's no question that our contract cost the company nothing when it's costs are balanced against its savings. No question. But there is mounting evidence that shows it may have been close to benefit neutral to us when it's increased wage rates are balanced against its concessions.

That's the answer to your question alfaromeo. They were thrilled to give us very little net gains in order to obtain 717's that were coming anyway.

Originally Posted by alfaromeo
Let's see if you can come up with some answer with even a shred of logic behind it.
See above you little people person you.

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 09-02-2014, 05:51 PM
  #1305  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Default

Originally Posted by scambo1
It has been established by the company in various written and verbal pieces that the 717s were too good to pass up, cost swa over a billion to sell them to us, etc. this is with the benefit of hindsight that I definitively say today that the 717s were coming...the company was going to find a way to get them here.

It is somehow your contention that we pilots were the lynchpin in this financing scheme...not ever going to believe that...ever.
Ahh, scambo

Originally Posted by scambo1

You can choose to believe whatever you want, but you poison the (reasoning) pool if you put your hope and theory out there as fact.

btw, Alfa gave you lot of hints, and then asked you a direct question. Are you just going to "poison the pool"? Maybe an answer not based on "hope and change."

Hey, did any other company pick up about 30 used narrowbodies just 6 weeks after our deal?
slowplay is offline  
Old 09-02-2014, 06:00 PM
  #1306  
The Brown Dot +1
 
scambo1's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Default

Originally Posted by slowplay
Ahh, scambo



btw, Alfa gave you lot of hints, and then asked you a direct question. Are you just going to "poison the pool"? Maybe an answer not based on "hope and change."

Hey, did any other company pick up about 30 used narrowbodies just 6 weeks after our deal?
What is your point?

Overall, the whole enchilada was cost neutral to the company. I am not saying the contract was cost neutral. I am saying the 717, 50 seat parking/76 seat acquisition, c12 all rolled together were cost neutral to the company.

Btw, I'm glad you like my quote.
scambo1 is offline  
Old 09-02-2014, 06:00 PM
  #1307  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by Alan Shore
I agree that the comparison did not show the differences between LOT and PBS bidding and all that one can do with each system, nor did I get any sense that it was trying to do so.
Shouldn't it have tried to do just that Alan? Shouldn't it have (at a minimum) provided us with a truly fair and balanced look? I contend it should be heavily partisan (within the confines of truth) to show us as weak as possible compared to our peers thus justifying demanding as big an opening position as could possibly be justified. I know I'm old school now and am not going to get that, but we at least need a fair, balanced and honest comparison to our industry peers. This is just one example that shows we didn't get that. And the survey opens tomorrow. Why would my union do this Alan?

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 09-02-2014, 06:04 PM
  #1308  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by CVG767A
+1!

Thanks for all the work you've done for the pilot group. It would be great if the whiners on this board would step up to the plate, and do the same, rather than whine about those that are doing the work.
So good to have the entire CVG mafia back together again.

I'm getting all verklempt.

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 09-02-2014, 06:15 PM
  #1309  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Gomerglideslope's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Posts: 335
Default

Originally Posted by alfaromeo
There is no point in trying to make sense out of what Carl writes. As he gets more and more desperate to have some relevance somewhere, he just pumps up his story. It really is whack a mole; you debunk one story, he creates another. After some period of time he brings back story number one and claims he proved it simply because he said he proved it. There is no logic, there is no data, only propaganda. He is just a slick propagandist with no sense of integrity or ethics, he simply spews out whatever he thinks will aid his cause.

You can try to debunk his stories one by one, but it doesn't matter. For instance in this silly story he claims the NC threatened to resign. What he fails to mention is that if this occurred any MEC member worth a damn would simply say, "see you later" and get a new committee. Are there only four guys in the whole pilot group who can negotiate a contract? He can't even complete a train of thought to a logical conclusion, he just makes his accusation and then hopes some dupe buys it without really thinking it out.

In the end, he has only one idea. He thinks the representatives that were voted by the Delta pilots to the MEC are too weak and too stupid to represent the pilots. They are easily fooled by lame tricks and silly threats into buying into some evil agenda. Then the Delta pilots are too weak and too stupid to represent themselves. He can't accept their membership ratification vote and invents new excuses every week about why they voted for their contract.

Carl's answer is simple. Only he and his webboard friends have the guts and knowledge to make decisions for all of us, and so he needs to circumvent all our democratic processes and just do what he says. The tyranny of the minority. Of course he knows this will never happen, he is too much of a coward to ever actually have to stand up for a decision. He just sits behind his keyboard and barks out his tough guy stance. If he actually had to stand up and make a real decision he would wet his pants.

Therefore, he will continue to spew out his propaganda, day after day, week after week. Don't look for logic or consistency. Only look for a coward making himself look big behind a keyboard. Then you will truly understand his agenda.
Old news alfa...not sure if he's too obstinate or too obtuse, in the end it doesn't really matter. Move on.
Gomerglideslope is offline  
Old 09-02-2014, 06:24 PM
  #1310  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by Hillbilly
Yeah, except that it wasn't. Raptor's very first post in this thread quoted the portion of your post that is in bold below. Your post didn't mention the contract comparison.
You're right Hillbilly, my mistake. I'm having that conversation, but it wasn't related to Raptor's post.

Originally Posted by Hillbilly
I am not discounting your statement regarding the vacation comparison though. It shows that we are behind FedEx, but the notes could have provided some additional details which would have shown the extent better.
It sure could have. My question is why didn't it? Why would we shade things in ways to benefit management's negotiating position? If you're going to err, shouldn't our bargaining agent err in our favor?

Originally Posted by Hillbilly
I value feedback from guys like Raptor to enlighten us to some of the nuances of other contracts.
Totally agree. Just wish we didn't have to get those important nuances from places other than our own union.

Don't be a stranger here Raptor.

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Kilroy
ExpressJet
10671
01-11-2016 06:49 AM
FastDEW
Major
201
09-03-2011 06:42 AM
Quagmire
Major
253
04-16-2011 06:19 AM
ksatflyer
Hangar Talk
10
08-20-2008 09:14 PM
INAV8OR
Mergers and Acquisitions
66
05-15-2008 04:37 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices