Details on Delta TA
06-13-2015, 05:30 PM
#8551
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
I've been lurking and can't keep out of this any longer. The talk is that pay is the only good thing in this TA? IMO, the pay is average at best and also dangerous in the B scale it presents on the E190. DALPA is promoting how the E190 will be 3.5% above JB in 2016 and 9.8% above JB in 2018. How about a comparison of JB and DL rates on the 320? On the 320, we will be 19.8% higher than JB in 2016 and 26.6% higher than JB in 2018! In my book, that adds up to an epic fail on the E190 rates. As it stands now, no one senior to 10,500 will have any interest in the E190. If the E190 rate was 19.8% higher than JB in 2016, the DL rate would be $218. At that rate, it would sit just below the 717 rate and be a real advance in pay over a FO position.
To me, the presentation by DALPA about E190 pay is just another example of an incomplete truth. I don't see how anyone can defend the E190 pay. It may be of no significance to many, but if the rates were paid in the same ratio to JB pay as the 320, I bet the E190 would get interest from seniority 6000 and below. A plane with interest from half the seniority list is a real gain. As it stands, we will certify a B scale that later could be used to establish 320 pay.
We need to organize and stop this now! No, no no.
To me, the presentation by DALPA about E190 pay is just another example of an incomplete truth. I don't see how anyone can defend the E190 pay. It may be of no significance to many, but if the rates were paid in the same ratio to JB pay as the 320, I bet the E190 would get interest from seniority 6000 and below. A plane with interest from half the seniority list is a real gain. As it stands, we will certify a B scale that later could be used to establish 320 pay.
We need to organize and stop this now! No, no no.
Now would I take lower pay on the Section 3 to get the E175 here? Yes. But only if God came down from Heaven, looked at our books and said, absolutely, the only way to make E175s at DAL viable is to pay that much. Then I'll go with it.
The E190 is already ours. It should be paying higher as you said. The rates are rather unappetizing shall we say. But it's not going to get much attention until it's out there and we're not only living with it but we're pulling the DC9 in LAX and replacing it with E190s and E190 pay. That won't be popular with anyone except those with SJS.
06-13-2015, 05:30 PM
#8552
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Posts: 403
Actually there is something quite a bit better in this TA than C2012. Money. I get it that you think the non-money issues make this TA worse than the current contract. You have to admit that a substantial amount of money is in play that greatly surpasses C2012. In that sense, C2016 is superior. Right?
I said there is nothing "else" to crow about, since every piece of DALPA communication begins and ends with pay rates. In the first year after signing, there might be some higher W-2s. After the scope givebacks take effect, profit sharing is cut while profits likely increase, and people assign personal dollar values to the QOL hits they have taken (getting sick by flying with sick people, even more time away from home, and missed chances at upgrades and WB jobs), I predict that we will be much worse off.
Now, back to the topic I asked about. How is painting Delta on foreign wide bodies or sick leave harassment good for the pilots?
06-13-2015, 05:31 PM
#8553
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,994
I agree this is separate. I read your number 2 as the 20% to 10% trigger change. Putting executive comp ahead of profit sharing computations is for NO OTHER PURPOSE than to pay less profit sharing to every member of the Delta team.
06-13-2015, 05:33 PM
#8554
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
It will absolutely be later, no question about that. In my view, the question is whether later is actually better under our current contract rather than sooner under the TA. So you have to ask yourself, do you fly Europe? Are you an FO? Are you junior? Will you get sick?
Carl
06-13-2015, 05:36 PM
#8556
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,994
You should be worried. Most of the captains have been around the block. They understand timely money in the pocket. They also understand that going back to RA for more is a silly thing to believe in. They understand that the next stop is the NMB and what happens down that road. Please see SWA, UPS, Fedex, Former US Airways, former AA.
Funny, my FO on my trip thinks it is a slam dunk Yes. Also, our jumpseating 767ER FO said it was a no brainer Yes as well. Both cited that history is littered with examples of not getting materially superior agreements after failed ratification or rejected TAs. Both also thought the NMB would laugh in DALPA's face when we demand more. Besides, looking at fixed pay plus PS, who could argue with AA + 20% or more?
Must admit, I wasn't going to argue against them. Smart FOs.
Funny, my FO on my trip thinks it is a slam dunk Yes. Also, our jumpseating 767ER FO said it was a no brainer Yes as well. Both cited that history is littered with examples of not getting materially superior agreements after failed ratification or rejected TAs. Both also thought the NMB would laugh in DALPA's face when we demand more. Besides, looking at fixed pay plus PS, who could argue with AA + 20% or more?
Must admit, I wasn't going to argue against them. Smart FOs.
You don't seem to understand that many of the NO voters aren't demanding MORE they are demanding LESS of the LESS. The "FOs you flew with" will figure it out in anyone else's "cockpit".
But continue...The more wackos we have defending this thing, the more rational thinkers will realize the answer to POS2015 is NO!
06-13-2015, 05:40 PM
#8557
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Posts: 403
Pasted from the EXECS thread - from a UAL guy and worth reading.
As a UA guy I can tell you that everybody over hear I have talked to cares.
We already have two of the big reasons you should vote NO on this TA in our contract. Both of which we desperately want to get rid of in our next one!!! If you guys can't hold the line, then we are screwed.
We have the 75% of OE need can be blocked from FO bidding and as a 747 FO it absolutely sucks. Choice Flying trips are blocked every month, leaving less flying trips for senior folks to bid on. So, more senior folks are forced into Bunkie (IRO) slots. Increasing the likelyhood that you will get to go back to the training center for landings, YIPEEEEEEEE!!!! Also build less lines, so you need less FOs, forcing folks on to reserve that should hold a line and denying bids to the next folks in line that want to upgrade. That of course cascades down the rest of the seniority list and like the preverbial snowball going down a hill gains size as it goes, you end up with folks on the outside that can't get in. It is a huge give to the company!!!!
The other part that we already have is the relaxed counting for JV/Scope. If you want to know how bad it is, the best example I can give is the LAX to Germany routes. We used to fly a 777 from LAX to FRA, but we don't anymore. Bad route you say, I laugh in your general direction, it is a great route!!!, just ask Lufthansa. They are currently flying an A380 from LAX-FRA, a 747-800 from LAX-FRA and an A340 from LAX-MUC. Thanks to our brilliant JV/Scope that is perfectly legal even though we don't get any metal on the route. A 757-200 counts the same as an A380!!!! You have got to be kidding me!!!!!!
Again, these are two of the sections that we swallowed a horse pill over in our last agreement because we didn't have a joint contract and needed to get one to move our group along as one. Our last agreement was a hold your nose and vote yes, because it wasn't really voting yes on a contract as much as it was voting yes to end the separation of the two pilot groups! There is no way our current contract would pass on its own merits and I think you would hear that pretty consistently from the UA group. The gives that you have in your TA are very painful, anyone who tries to tell you differently is a either a Bold Faced Liar or completely ignorant. Those are the only two choices.
If you vote yes on this and are in the bottom 3/4 of the seniority list, I think you will see that, despite the pay raises, your W-2 earnings will actually be lower than they would have been once the widebody growth stagnation is fully realized! Pay raises with no growth on the top end are worse than no pay raises but real Widebody growth!
We had a huge number of outside compelling reasons to vote for a less than ideal contract 3 years ago. Those are gone for us and I don't see anyway that we would vote for your TA and I don't see any reason that you should either!
As a UA guy I can tell you that everybody over hear I have talked to cares.
We already have two of the big reasons you should vote NO on this TA in our contract. Both of which we desperately want to get rid of in our next one!!! If you guys can't hold the line, then we are screwed.
We have the 75% of OE need can be blocked from FO bidding and as a 747 FO it absolutely sucks. Choice Flying trips are blocked every month, leaving less flying trips for senior folks to bid on. So, more senior folks are forced into Bunkie (IRO) slots. Increasing the likelyhood that you will get to go back to the training center for landings, YIPEEEEEEEE!!!! Also build less lines, so you need less FOs, forcing folks on to reserve that should hold a line and denying bids to the next folks in line that want to upgrade. That of course cascades down the rest of the seniority list and like the preverbial snowball going down a hill gains size as it goes, you end up with folks on the outside that can't get in. It is a huge give to the company!!!!
The other part that we already have is the relaxed counting for JV/Scope. If you want to know how bad it is, the best example I can give is the LAX to Germany routes. We used to fly a 777 from LAX to FRA, but we don't anymore. Bad route you say, I laugh in your general direction, it is a great route!!!, just ask Lufthansa. They are currently flying an A380 from LAX-FRA, a 747-800 from LAX-FRA and an A340 from LAX-MUC. Thanks to our brilliant JV/Scope that is perfectly legal even though we don't get any metal on the route. A 757-200 counts the same as an A380!!!! You have got to be kidding me!!!!!!
Again, these are two of the sections that we swallowed a horse pill over in our last agreement because we didn't have a joint contract and needed to get one to move our group along as one. Our last agreement was a hold your nose and vote yes, because it wasn't really voting yes on a contract as much as it was voting yes to end the separation of the two pilot groups! There is no way our current contract would pass on its own merits and I think you would hear that pretty consistently from the UA group. The gives that you have in your TA are very painful, anyone who tries to tell you differently is a either a Bold Faced Liar or completely ignorant. Those are the only two choices.
If you vote yes on this and are in the bottom 3/4 of the seniority list, I think you will see that, despite the pay raises, your W-2 earnings will actually be lower than they would have been once the widebody growth stagnation is fully realized! Pay raises with no growth on the top end are worse than no pay raises but real Widebody growth!
We had a huge number of outside compelling reasons to vote for a less than ideal contract 3 years ago. Those are gone for us and I don't see anyway that we would vote for your TA and I don't see any reason that you should either!
06-13-2015, 05:45 PM
#8558
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Position: Downward-Facing Dog Pose
Posts: 1,537
Pasted from the EXECS thread - from a UAL guy and worth reading.
As a UA guy I can tell you that everybody over hear I have talked to cares.
We already have two of the big reasons you should vote NO on this TA in our contract. Both of which we desperately want to get rid of in our next one!!! If you guys can't hold the line, then we are screwed.
We have the 75% of OE need can be blocked from FO bidding and as a 747 FO it absolutely sucks. Choice Flying trips are blocked every month, leaving less flying trips for senior folks to bid on. So, more senior folks are forced into Bunkie (IRO) slots. Increasing the likelyhood that you will get to go back to the training center for landings, YIPEEEEEEEE!!!! Also build less lines, so you need less FOs, forcing folks on to reserve that should hold a line and denying bids to the next folks in line that want to upgrade. That of course cascades down the rest of the seniority list and like the preverbial snowball going down a hill gains size as it goes, you end up with folks on the outside that can't get in. It is a huge give to the company!!!!
The other part that we already have is the relaxed counting for JV/Scope. If you want to know how bad it is, the best example I can give is the LAX to Germany routes. We used to fly a 777 from LAX to FRA, but we don't anymore. Bad route you say, I laugh in your general direction, it is a great route!!!, just ask Lufthansa. They are currently flying an A380 from LAX-FRA, a 747-800 from LAX-FRA and an A340 from LAX-MUC. Thanks to our brilliant JV/Scope that is perfectly legal even though we don't get any metal on the route. A 757-200 counts the same as an A380!!!! You have got to be kidding me!!!!!!
Again, these are two of the sections that we swallowed a horse pill over in our last agreement because we didn't have a joint contract and needed to get one to move our group along as one. Our last agreement was a hold your nose and vote yes, because it wasn't really voting yes on a contract as much as it was voting yes to end the separation of the two pilot groups! There is no way our current contract would pass on its own merits and I think you would hear that pretty consistently from the UA group. The gives that you have in your TA are very painful, anyone who tries to tell you differently is a either a Bold Faced Liar or completely ignorant. Those are the only two choices.
If you vote yes on this and are in the bottom 3/4 of the seniority list, I think you will see that, despite the pay raises, your W-2 earnings will actually be lower than they would have been once the widebody growth stagnation is fully realized! Pay raises with no growth on the top end are worse than no pay raises but real Widebody growth!
We had a huge number of outside compelling reasons to vote for a less than ideal contract 3 years ago. Those are gone for us and I don't see anyway that we would vote for your TA and I don't see any reason that you should either!
As a UA guy I can tell you that everybody over hear I have talked to cares.
We already have two of the big reasons you should vote NO on this TA in our contract. Both of which we desperately want to get rid of in our next one!!! If you guys can't hold the line, then we are screwed.
We have the 75% of OE need can be blocked from FO bidding and as a 747 FO it absolutely sucks. Choice Flying trips are blocked every month, leaving less flying trips for senior folks to bid on. So, more senior folks are forced into Bunkie (IRO) slots. Increasing the likelyhood that you will get to go back to the training center for landings, YIPEEEEEEEE!!!! Also build less lines, so you need less FOs, forcing folks on to reserve that should hold a line and denying bids to the next folks in line that want to upgrade. That of course cascades down the rest of the seniority list and like the preverbial snowball going down a hill gains size as it goes, you end up with folks on the outside that can't get in. It is a huge give to the company!!!!
The other part that we already have is the relaxed counting for JV/Scope. If you want to know how bad it is, the best example I can give is the LAX to Germany routes. We used to fly a 777 from LAX to FRA, but we don't anymore. Bad route you say, I laugh in your general direction, it is a great route!!!, just ask Lufthansa. They are currently flying an A380 from LAX-FRA, a 747-800 from LAX-FRA and an A340 from LAX-MUC. Thanks to our brilliant JV/Scope that is perfectly legal even though we don't get any metal on the route. A 757-200 counts the same as an A380!!!! You have got to be kidding me!!!!!!
Again, these are two of the sections that we swallowed a horse pill over in our last agreement because we didn't have a joint contract and needed to get one to move our group along as one. Our last agreement was a hold your nose and vote yes, because it wasn't really voting yes on a contract as much as it was voting yes to end the separation of the two pilot groups! There is no way our current contract would pass on its own merits and I think you would hear that pretty consistently from the UA group. The gives that you have in your TA are very painful, anyone who tries to tell you differently is a either a Bold Faced Liar or completely ignorant. Those are the only two choices.
If you vote yes on this and are in the bottom 3/4 of the seniority list, I think you will see that, despite the pay raises, your W-2 earnings will actually be lower than they would have been once the widebody growth stagnation is fully realized! Pay raises with no growth on the top end are worse than no pay raises but real Widebody growth!
We had a huge number of outside compelling reasons to vote for a less than ideal contract 3 years ago. Those are gone for us and I don't see anyway that we would vote for your TA and I don't see any reason that you should either!
The post above was written by GoCats67 who is a UAL gear slinger and deserves to be recognized for his solidarity, best intentions, and helpful insight. Thanks again, Cats. Glad to see this reposted in this thread for reference sake.
http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/1904324-post9.html
06-13-2015, 05:48 PM
#8559
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Carl
06-13-2015, 05:49 PM
#8560
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Posts: 403
I was going to block your posts, but note I realize the pure comedic value they contain. Please don't stop!
You don't seem to understand that many of the NO voters aren't demanding MORE they are demanding LESS of the LESS. The "FOs you flew with" will figure it out in anyone else's "cockpit".
But continue...The more wackos we have defending this thing, the more rational thinkers will realize the answer to POS2015 is NO!
You don't seem to understand that many of the NO voters aren't demanding MORE they are demanding LESS of the LESS. The "FOs you flew with" will figure it out in anyone else's "cockpit".
But continue...The more wackos we have defending this thing, the more rational thinkers will realize the answer to POS2015 is NO!
Pilot: We care about QOL. How will this contract improve it?
DALPA: You will make more money.
Pilot: I'm not asking about money. I want my life to be better and have more time at home.
DALPA: We will be parked.
Pilot: So that means we can keep our current contract?
DALPA: You will make more money. We will be parked. And time value of money.
I'll admit, it's a gutsy strategy, pinning all their sales on one item. I just hope it doesn't work.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
