Alan Shore

Agreed. I haven't seen anything from ALPA on this either, other than the new 12 G. That language states that the sleep opportunity begins when the pilot reaches his hotel room, which is consistent with the FAR interpretations that I've read. No word about when it ends, though.

So, your input was to remove CDOs from the TA, they did so, but you think it was because they were getting so much heat and not because of your input? What was your input, other than heat-generating negative feedback?

I can guarantee you that your input will be combined with the rest of ours into a consensus of the pilot group, and that consensus will be used to craft the opener and drive negotiations thereafter.

LeineLodge

Fair enough, as well

LeineLodge

My disagreement I guess is that I believe we HAVE made significant gains (or recoveries, depending on how long you've been here) in the past 2 contracts and various LOA's. Are we back to the buying power of yesteryear? Clearly not. Are we better off than if we had made the "big ask" in C2012 and ended up mired in the Section 6 process (subjective but a likely possibility IMO) and still living under JPWA rates - along with UAL/AA/USAir whom have all basically piggybacked UP to our level? I say yes.

While not extremely satisfying, the last round did effectively pull the industry up significantly in a time of projected, yet not quite realized, financial success.

Times have changed, and now financial success is no longer projected - it's here and then some. At the risk of sounding like a forum radical, now is the time to make the "big ask." If not now, then it will never happen.

It will be difficult to achieve, but Delta can afford it, and if they act quickly enough might even force the competition up as well (ref the AA industry snapshot in 2016.)

I'm still pondering my survery, and have not hit the submit button yet. However, my number is a lot closer to your 25/10/10 than 4/8/3/3. I don't care if they want to hide it in work rules, rigs, etc so it doesn't actually look so big, but now is the time to recover what was lost in this career.

I meant it when I said a few posts back that I expect Delta pilots to SHARE in Delta's unprecendented success.

DAL 88 Driver

The FAR has the word on that. You have to have the opportunity to get 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep. The FAR further specifies that it's up to the individual pilot to determine if he/she got that opportunity. Obviously, "8 hours behind the door" does not give any human being the possibility/opportunity for 8 hours of sleep. So the answer is that the period ends something MORE than 8 hours from the time you walk into the hotel room. To be in compliance, you would have to allow time to get ready for bed and then you would have to allow time in the morning after waking up to get ready to walk back out of the room for pickup. For me, that would be a minimum of 30 minutes to be ready for bed after walking into the room and a minimum of 30 minutes after waking up the next morning to be ready to walk out of the room. So for me, the minimum number of hours "behind the door" in order to be in compliance with FAR 117 is 9. Your mileage may vary, but I'd be surprised if anyone could honestly say it would be much less than 9. And, as I previously stated, 8 hours would be physically impossible. Maybe it's best to just leave that one alone. But when I became aware of the fact that "8 hours behind the door" was being put out as the answer by the SLC Captain rep and then the chairman of the scheduling committee agreed with that, it made me concerned that DALPA could be putting out bad information that could get a pilot in trouble with a violation. When 3 of my 4 reps wouldn't give me a straight answer to the question and even went so far as to support what the SLC Captain rep and the scheduling committee chair had said, that became yet another unsatisfactory exchange that I've had with my reps.


I strongly suspect that their ultimate reason for removing the CDO's was not directly because of the input they were getting on whether we should have CDO's or not but because it was generating so much heat that they were worried about getting recalled. They certainly seemed pretty passionate about supporting the CDO's in their email exchanges with me... until they didn't.


You mean like it was in C2012?

DAL 88 Driver

I like most of what you're saying. I really do. But to characterize the gains we've made as significant progress toward restoration... well that just doesn't fly. Looking at pay rates, we took a 42% cut. 10 years later we're at a 34% cut (adjusted for published inflation, which arguably doesn't fully reflect the true cost of living increases). Mathematically, that is very little progress given the amount of time it has taken relative to the amount of time the average Delta pilot who has been here during that time has left.

And we're going forward with essentially the same strategy that brought us the results to date. I just don't see that working. What do you think will be different? Like I've said many times before, I absolutely believe that proactive engagement is the way things should work in a healthy business. But it requires a mutually respectful relationship where both parties work together for each others' benefit. I don't see a 34% cut (greater than the percentage of the pay cut we took prior to bankruptcy in a desperate attempt during an extreme financial crisis to keep Delta from filing bankruptcy) in today's environment being representative of respect being show to us as professionals or as human beings. Do you think management is suddenly going to recognize this on their own, without any prompting from us, and make it right?

Alan Shore

Agreed.

I'm not sure I see the difference. If a rep consistently disregard the input of his constituents, he has every reason to expect to be recalled. The way I read this is that, once the reps had received a significant amount of negative feedback on CDOs, they directed their removal from the TA.

Exactly. You and I may differ as to exactly what it is that our reps are supposed to do with the results of the survey. If the survey results indicate X but they have reason to believe that only Y is achievable and that settling for Y is better in the long run than continuing to hold out for X, are you saying that they should disregard their information and go against their best judgment?

Please disregard, for the sake of the discussion above, the issue of whether or not you agree with their assessment.

shiznit

index, sorry it took me a while, I actually do things besides this forum in my off time...(cue the requisite beer drinking comment)

Not that it matters, but:
I'm not a rep.
I do volunteer.
I have had trips dropped to do ALPA work.

I'm sure if you want to do the kinds of volunteer work I do you can call the MEC office and get involved very easily. There aren't nearly enough pilot volunteers as it stands now. Your help will be greatly appreciated.

To answer Leine's questions also:

1. Yes. completed on paper for now. I put it away for 2 weeks and will redo it fresh and compare the results to make sure that my answers are as accurate as possible.
2. Yes. I give $46 per paycheck to the PAC and am a Behncke Circle contributor.
3. Yes. I give them my perspective on all major issues as they provide council updates. They got an email from me just yesterday regarding the early out.
4. Yes. I always do them, and I usually follow up with a personalized letter on their official website. I hadn't done it the most recent two yet but I went to the ALPA website before finishing this post.

Leine is asking the real questions that matter...Hope you can answer "yes" to all four.

DAL 88 Driver

Yes. Their job is to represent the pilots in their council. What gives them the right to substitute their judgment for the judgment of the Delta pilots they represent? To use a Top Gun quote: "That's pretty arrogant, considering the company you're in."

LeineLodge

For me it just boils down to we are where we are, not where we want to be.

I'll take your numbers at face value, since I've never done the buying power calculations that you clearly have. Of course I would like that 34% to be smaller - wouldn't we all? Where we again differ is that I believe that number would actually be larger (ie still stuck on JPWA rates) if we had gone the traditional route and taken 2-5 years to achieve a Section 6 contract.

The LOA's along the way are even better because they clear the way for a more streamlined conversation when we get back to Section 6 in April. That conversation can now be essentially "now that the recovery has actually taken place, and Delta is solid financially, we expect to share in the success." I don't believe that conversation would/could have been taken seriously in spring/summer of 2012. April 2015? You betcha.

Also, fwiw framing the conversation in terms of "getting back what we gave up," "lack of respect" or "restoration" is not likely to yield success. The only people on the planet that give 2 hoots about that are the Delta pilots. If we want to move the rock up the hill, we have to work within the framework that exists, and deal with things as they are, not as we want them to be.

A more appropriate argument IMO is to be compensated commensurate with the financial success that we enable 24/7/365, through our safety, professionalism, and yes, labor peace. To get to where we want to be, we need to put forth an argument as to why we warrant a (large, using your numbers) premium over the rest of the industry.

index

Thanks shiz. BTW, beer drinking and forum surfing go hand in hand.