Delta Pilots Association
10-24-2010, 07:38 AM
#1541
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 852
It's the APC Rule Of Double Standards. I get it.
10-24-2010, 09:18 AM
#1543
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,462
Slow, I thought it was stated that all of the pilots that took the early out caused the pension to be grossly underfunded? Didn't that action that many describe cause the pension fund to become unstable and therefore the "need" for termination?
Just asking. That is the story I was told.
Just asking. That is the story I was told.
The pension became grossly underfunded because four things happened nearly simultaneously:
1) The earned benefits of all participants increased dramatically as C2K payrates kicked in.
2) Poor market performance resulted in the plan not earning its assumed rate of return.
3) Poor economic conditions precluded DAL from making additional payments to compensate for the lack of market returns.
4) Literally thousands of pilots withdrew 50% of their benefit at a time when the market was down - essentially locking in the losses to the DB plan.
10-24-2010, 09:38 AM
#1544
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,902
How many aircraft have been parked since the merger, versus the ones "added"?
How many pilots have retired/quit versus the number hired? Is the total number of pilots on the list greater? Or less?
Discuss...
Nu
10-24-2010, 09:51 AM
#1545
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,588
acl,
The pension became grossly underfunded because four things happened nearly simultaneously:
1) The earned benefits of all participants increased dramatically as C2K payrates kicked in.
2) Poor market performance resulted in the plan not earning its assumed rate of return.
3) Poor economic conditions precluded DAL from making additional payments to compensate for the lack of market returns.
4) Literally thousands of pilots withdrew 50% of their benefit at a time when the market was down - essentially locking in the losses to the DB plan.
The pension became grossly underfunded because four things happened nearly simultaneously:
1) The earned benefits of all participants increased dramatically as C2K payrates kicked in.
2) Poor market performance resulted in the plan not earning its assumed rate of return.
3) Poor economic conditions precluded DAL from making additional payments to compensate for the lack of market returns.
4) Literally thousands of pilots withdrew 50% of their benefit at a time when the market was down - essentially locking in the losses to the DB plan.
The above is all correct. The big one was number 1 but no one wants to discuss that. The pension was funded for a anticipated level of payouts. The hourly rates went way up with C2K. In addition there were more ways to make more money beyond the hourly rates. You could get paid for training, vacation and flying beyond the cap. The huge training pipeline with the crew manning changes post 911 lead to massive greenslips. FAE for pilots leaving went through the roof. Pre 2000 a FAE of 200,000 k was the norm. FAE's in excess of 400,000 were not at all unusual in the retirement run. The plan was never funded for that.
10-24-2010, 10:19 AM
#1546
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,588
The basic question however was about safety not who flies what.
10-24-2010, 10:28 AM
#1547
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,588
Gloopy,
This pilot group views scope in a completely different way than it ever has before. You've got very senior Captains on here railing about how important it is! Everyone I fly with and everyone I run into talks about scope as being extremely important. You would have never seen that before the last couple of years. So, no, I don't think this pilot group will relax scope or give up on scope restoration no matter how big the pay increase is. I know I certainly won't.
But on the other hand, I won't vote for a contract that doesn't at least make significant progress towards pay restoration over the life of the contract. Your suggested increases do not come anywhere close to my minimum threshold. If ALPA is thinking like you on this (which I suspect they are), then I will vote for DPA in a heartbeat.
This pilot group views scope in a completely different way than it ever has before. You've got very senior Captains on here railing about how important it is! Everyone I fly with and everyone I run into talks about scope as being extremely important. You would have never seen that before the last couple of years. So, no, I don't think this pilot group will relax scope or give up on scope restoration no matter how big the pay increase is. I know I certainly won't.
But on the other hand, I won't vote for a contract that doesn't at least make significant progress towards pay restoration over the life of the contract. Your suggested increases do not come anywhere close to my minimum threshold. If ALPA is thinking like you on this (which I suspect they are), then I will vote for DPA in a heartbeat.
10-24-2010, 10:48 AM
#1548
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,503
DALPA, not ALPA will construct their contract opener based on pilot input and the contract surveys. Keep in mind however that this forum does not represent the mainstream pilot. In talking to most pilots I don't think to many expect a 64 percent raise in the next contract. If the surveys produce a opener less then what you want but where most pilots fall I am sure it will be all DALPA's fault. They represent the majority of pilots. They don't represent individual wants and desires.
For all intent and purposes, DALPA does not do a good job at communicating or listening to "pilot input." (rec'd and tabled resolutions,or my favorite, "I can't tell you because of confidentiality"...so on, and so on.) Now you are telling me that they are going to base the key point to any negotiating strategy on "pilot input and contract surveys"
So, if I understand you, if the input and the corrupted Wilson polling data say 100% then that is the opener? And along the same lines, if the data says that all we need is a modest 2 to 3% a year on existing rates as long as they bring crew meals back, then hence the opener?
This is why we need professional negotiators. If DPA can deliver on that, bring it on. Sailing, you are doing a great job of high lighting the failings and misguided actions of DALPA and ALPA.
10-24-2010, 11:08 AM
#1549
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Capt
Posts: 2,049
Think they will start watching the feet anytime soon? Down about 70 and 300 IMO, but who's counting.....
10-24-2010, 11:41 AM
#1550
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,324
Apparently, the great Karnak cannot see back in the past very accurately. Speaking of double standars.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Lbell911
Regional
23
04-22-2012 10:33 AM
