Search

Notices

Details on Delta TA

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-31-2015, 08:19 AM
  #5231  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by rube
The leaks/rumors/floaters don't always come from behind the doors of a closed session meeting. Some of them are like a "show bird" at the trap range. The clay target sails out, and now the other side knows a bit more about where to aim. Some of this stuff is pure garbage, but some of it is written to either prevent a democratic outcome, or to gain intelligence about the pilots' price point in MEMRAT.

But the average bear can't tell the difference. We're talking millions of dollars here, paid for with just a few well-placed words. Congratulations. Management now knows your lowest number, and is certain that APC is filled with complete loons. The latest super premium update from C20 touches on this a bit.

Now that's irony.
Hey rube, nobody's buying this. It's the same case that Sink r8, slowplay, sailingfun, shiznit, etc. is making, and it's not flying. You can't make the case that reps communicating with those they represent is costing us all money. It just makes you guys look even more foolish...if that's even possible.

This is saving us money and is the best possible thing that could be happening.

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 05-31-2015, 08:26 AM
  #5232  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by forgot to bid
If the CDO debacle confirmed anything for us, as well as these recent LEC letters, we as line pilots are actually negotiting against the negotiating committee more than the company.

Still not sure how guys getting up and arms about rj, greenslip, lca and pay issues is a negative. I just don't see that.

The only problem it probably presents is for the NC.
Yup. We belong to a pretend Union. A union in theory only. Problem is that half our reps specifically like it that way. The other half doesn't. It's a battle for the soul of this union. Do we stay a fake/pretend union, or do we try to become a real one.

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 05-31-2015, 08:26 AM
  #5233  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,919
Default

Originally Posted by Hank Kingsley
In 2012, our economic analysis folks did not predict the billions in profits. So we accepted paltry pay raises and concessions. Now we know the truth moving forward. The company wants a fast contract because it will be difficult to negotiate in this climate of ridiculous profits, including stock buy backs, dividends, etc. I would predict they go on another buying spree, i.e. Virgin Atlantic, refineries, GOL and RJ purchases. They did it post C2102.

"Those who can not remember the past are condemned to repeat it".
Originally Posted by rube
The leaks/rumors/floaters don't always come from behind the doors of a closed session meeting. Some of them are like a "show bird" at the trap range. The clay target sails out, and now the other side knows a bit more about where to aim. Some of this stuff is pure garbage, but some of it is written to either prevent a democratic outcome, or to gain intelligence about the pilots' price point in MEMRAT.

But the average bear can't tell the difference. We're talking millions of dollars here, paid for with just a few well-placed words. Congratulations. Management now knows your lowest number, and is certain that APC is filled with complete loons. The latest super premium update from C20 touches on this a bit.

Now that's irony.
Let me guess......Long time lurker upset with all the disinformation coming out and felt compelled to post.
DeadHead is offline  
Old 05-31-2015, 08:29 AM
  #5234  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 618
Default

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
Yup. We belong to a pretend Union. A union in theory only. Problem is that half our reps specifically like it that way. The other half doesn't. It's a battle for the soul of this union. Do we stay a fake/pretend union, or do we try to become a real one.



Carl

I would love to hear your alternative? Actually, give me a solution to your problem. Step by step. What is the problem and how do we fix it?
Professor is offline  
Old 05-31-2015, 08:46 AM
  #5235  
Gets Weekends Off
 
notEnuf's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Position: stake holder ir.delta.com
Posts: 10,456
Default

Originally Posted by Professor
I would love to hear your alternative? Actually, give me a solution to your problem. Step by step. What is the problem and how do we fix it?
I'll take this one.

The problem is we are rushing to a deal. Not The deal.

The solution is slow down and get the Q2 results in July.

There isn't even a carrot this time. No shiny new captain wings or airplanes. At least hold out for the carrot. I'm hungry and drooling over the buffet.
notEnuf is offline  
Old 05-31-2015, 08:56 AM
  #5236  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Posts: 367
Default

Originally Posted by notEnuf
Part C

Profit sharing is worth 10% of 2.5B + 20% of 2.5B+

2014 was 4.5B

250M + 400M based on 2014 payout. = 650M

If monetized dollar for dollar: 650M

That's a 28.8% pay increase day 1. If you keep profit sharing at 20% above 4.5 billion this is a cost neutral deal.

The original Question was:

Is this to much to ask?

NO!, its too Little!

Cost neutral is a 28.8% raise if we reset profit sharing to 4.5B

Ed Bastian could still say "cost neutral" and we would still participate in the upside.


Disclaimer:

That's just pay. We need to make gains. For every dollar value we give up we are a cost savings to management. Notice I said gains not the c word. I can't even use that word in this, the best negotiating environment in our history.

^^ This


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
300SMK is offline  
Old 05-31-2015, 08:57 AM
  #5237  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Posts: 367
Default

Originally Posted by DeadHead
Let me guess......Long time lurker upset with all the disinformation coming out and felt compelled to post.

I was going to guess Ford and Harrison or an intern.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
300SMK is offline  
Old 05-31-2015, 09:00 AM
  #5238  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Posts: 367
Default Delta C2015

$5 billion dollar stock buyback at 7 years into a bull run. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that money could replace all the 88's or give us a fleet of A350s in SEA and LAX to compete with Asian and ME carriers. Nope, it goes to good will.

I will take the 20% PS and drag my feet like no other. Fly the contract.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
300SMK is offline  
Old 05-31-2015, 09:21 AM
  #5239  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Big E 757's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: A320 Left seat
Posts: 2,591
Default

Originally Posted by slowplay
You might want to check your math. The pilots are now about 37% of the profit sharing pool.
But if we agree to give up some PS, the company will reduce PS for all non union groups. So let's use the entire PS pool for our calculations because the company will save that % ultimately.
Big E 757 is offline  
Old 05-31-2015, 09:42 AM
  #5240  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Position: C560XL/XLS/XLS+
Posts: 1,278
Default

Originally Posted by 300SMK
$5 billion dollar stock buyback at 7 years into a bull run. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that money could replace all the 88's or give us a fleet of A350s in SEA and LAX to compete with Asian and ME carriers. Nope, it goes to good will.

I will take the 20% PS and drag my feet like no other. Fly the contract.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
All so true, the stock buy back is already yesterday's news. If they had spent a fraction of the money on supertugs for every hub, and a replacement for the MD-80's it would have been $ well spent. RA and his minions aren't looking so smart anymore. Blowing billions on stockbuybacks and fuel hedges to go along with a now questionable refinery purchase. It's starting to look like RA and the boys are only interested in lining their pockets long term. If they wanted to reduce the stock float why not do a reverse 2 for 1 or 4 for 1 split? I know, Wall Street would hate that but the effect would be only temporary as all things are.
dalad 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