Delta Pilots Association
07-04-2013, 05:00 PM
#7681
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
I've never ever said I love the concept. But it's what we have. The only thing I and others are asking is how on earth would you transition to something else? Show an exact plan of transition and I'll listen.
No. At Delta the 747 is 200,000 lbs bigger than the 777...but the pay is the same.
I can't tout anything until you explain to us exactly how we would transition to something else. We've already started the process with pay banding the 747 and 777...take us the rest of the way t.
Put your emotions aside long enough to analyze this tsquare. Straight longevity based pay would equalize all pilots' pay based on their longevity. Pay is the only thing that has mattered to arbitrators lately in an SLI. We are likely to see a merger with Alaska or someone else. This could very likely open the door to straight date of hire or a top to bottom ratio. That would provide the merging pilot group with a massive windfall, and I'm not interested in giving them that.
Carl
No. At Delta the 747 is 200,000 lbs bigger than the 777...but the pay is the same.
Carl
07-04-2013, 07:01 PM
#7682
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
Don't care who you are, that's some funny stuff right there!
07-04-2013, 07:59 PM
#7683
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
07-06-2013, 11:31 AM
#7685
Looking for a laugh
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,099
Quite frankly, you and ALPAites are two sides of the same coin. You both have an agenda, to get me the average line pilot, to see things your way. Nothing wrong with that, but the DPA's credibility isn't that much mo' betta than ALPA's.
07-06-2013, 12:37 PM
#7686
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
08-12-2013, 06:46 AM
#7687
Straight QOL, homie
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
Posts: 4,202
Question: Are we better off in a merger with an ALPA carrier (think Alaska) with our without ALPA?
I contend we'd have much more leeway to defend ourselves and ensure fairness if we were had an in-house union, and were not weighed down by ALPA's presence.
I don't want a windfall, but I don't want to get bent over in what could be a very ugly SLI with ALPA's agenda hanging over our heads.
I contend we'd have much more leeway to defend ourselves and ensure fairness if we were had an in-house union, and were not weighed down by ALPA's presence.
I don't want a windfall, but I don't want to get bent over in what could be a very ugly SLI with ALPA's agenda hanging over our heads.
08-12-2013, 07:08 AM
#7689
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Question: Are we better off in a merger with an ALPA carrier (think Alaska) with our without ALPA?
I contend we'd have much more leeway to defend ourselves and ensure fairness if we were had an in-house union, and were not weighed down by ALPA's presence.
I don't want a windfall, but I don't want to get bent over in what could be a very ugly SLI with ALPA's agenda hanging over our heads.
I contend we'd have much more leeway to defend ourselves and ensure fairness if we were had an in-house union, and were not weighed down by ALPA's presence.
I don't want a windfall, but I don't want to get bent over in what could be a very ugly SLI with ALPA's agenda hanging over our heads.
08-12-2013, 07:30 AM
#7690
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
ALPA has a process, not an "agenda."
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 08-12-2013 at 07:44 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Lbell911
Regional
23
04-22-2012 10:33 AM
