Delta posts $765M profit in 3Q
12-27-2011, 11:42 PM
#71
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Good news, it looks like the total number of SWA pilots has finally been corrected on the TransStats site. It was in error by almost 1000 pilots. Actual total for 2010 was 5564, vs the previous reported 6423. The Airline Data Project data that is supposedly from MIT is now officially garbage.
This is how far we've got to go just to equal SWAPA's pay scale...not to mention their incredible scope language. DALPA??
Carl
12-28-2011, 06:03 AM
#72
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: 330 FO
Posts: 584
This is exactly correct and what I've been preaching for months now. It is the very best overall strategy we have without any doubt. But I'm afraid our current union has already been badly compromised in some fashion by management and our union's leaders have a strong incentive to give management what THEY want.
We will never see the survey results. We will never see the opener. We will never even see a summary of the opener. We will never see a transcript of our forced negotiations with the unions of our direct regional competitors over OUR scope language.
When we see our incredibly weak Tentative Agreement, we will have to vote NO or be happy with being far below every SWA pilot for many years to come. Wish we weren't in this position...but we are.
Carl
We will never see the survey results. We will never see the opener. We will never even see a summary of the opener. We will never see a transcript of our forced negotiations with the unions of our direct regional competitors over OUR scope language.
When we see our incredibly weak Tentative Agreement, we will have to vote NO or be happy with being far below every SWA pilot for many years to come. Wish we weren't in this position...but we are.
Carl
but I think you're spot-on, here.
12-28-2011, 06:13 AM
#73
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 4,105
Personally, I think some of these old DAL pilots are too far out of touch with what has happened around them. "SWA pilots make more than us? No way!" ... I've heard that exact comment a couple of times when I've talked to my captains about it. Some actually down right didn't believe me.
I think there is systemic denial going on. And of course, I believe some are being paid off by management.
But I can tell you that most of the guys I have flown with are wanting a BIG increase in pay (more than I asked for in the survey). Many of them mentioned scope too. So with that, I feel somewhat positive going forward.
I think there is systemic denial going on. And of course, I believe some are being paid off by management.
But I can tell you that most of the guys I have flown with are wanting a BIG increase in pay (more than I asked for in the survey). Many of them mentioned scope too. So with that, I feel somewhat positive going forward.
12-28-2011, 06:21 AM
#74
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Personally, I think some of these old DAL pilots are too far out of touch with what has happened around them. "SWA pilots make more than us? No way!" ... I've heard that exact comment a couple of times when I've talked to my captains about it. Some actually down right didn't believe me.
I think there is systemic denial going on. And of course, I believe some are being paid off by management.
But I can tell you that most of the guys I have flown with are wanting a BIG increase in pay (more than I asked for in the survey). Many of them mentioned scope too. So with that, I feel somewhat positive going forward.
I think there is systemic denial going on. And of course, I believe some are being paid off by management.
But I can tell you that most of the guys I have flown with are wanting a BIG increase in pay (more than I asked for in the survey). Many of them mentioned scope too. So with that, I feel somewhat positive going forward.
Fatboy, you forget who your collective bargaining agent is. You wont see the survey results. Everything will take place out of your view.
12-28-2011, 07:39 AM
#76
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Position: DAL FO
Posts: 134
+40% pay
All delta flying done by delta pilots.
If I don't see these I don't vote yes. I'm a pretty simple dude.
All delta flying done by delta pilots.
If I don't see these I don't vote yes. I'm a pretty simple dude.
12-28-2011, 04:19 PM
#78
Sho me da money!
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: B25, Left
Posts: 947
This is exactly correct and what I've been preaching for months now. It is the very best overall strategy we have without any doubt. But I'm afraid our current union has already been badly compromised in some fashion by management and our union's leaders have a strong incentive to give management what THEY want.
We will never see the survey results. We will never see the opener. We will never even see a summary of the opener. We will never see a transcript of our forced negotiations with the unions of our direct regional competitors over OUR scope language.
When we see our incredibly weak Tentative Agreement, we will have to vote NO or be happy with being far below every SWA pilot for many years to come. Wish we weren't in this position...but we are.
Carl
We will never see the survey results. We will never see the opener. We will never even see a summary of the opener. We will never see a transcript of our forced negotiations with the unions of our direct regional competitors over OUR scope language.
When we see our incredibly weak Tentative Agreement, we will have to vote NO or be happy with being far below every SWA pilot for many years to come. Wish we weren't in this position...but we are.
Carl
Man that has a real nice ring to it!
Reverend Carl Spackler or as we like to call him down at the homeless pilot shelter "R C"
12-31-2011, 11:50 AM
#80
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,544
How about an opinion, based on facts?
We could get into numerous layers of expectation management over the last couple years but let's instead just focus on one of the most recent developments.
Let's look at the recent slot swap "mainline massacre" where DALPA and the company worked together to lobby for something that was promoted as significantly helping mainline. Turns out it didn't help mainline as the slot growth was DCI to the tune of 95% or so. And now for the rest of the story: (Paul Harvey all up in hey, ch'all!)
After the "mainline massacre" there were several LEC written statements released on the subject from multipile LEC's including the biggest one that's closest to the action on Va. Ave. While they all said how they were dissapointed and were misled by the company and were promised significantly more mainline growth that we saw, all the letters summarized by stating that not only was everything kosher within our CBA, but this was still good news because it would result in more revenue for the company and we will hopefully get a share of that. Let's break those two things down shall we?
Yes, it is legal IAW our CBA. Duh. But what's the 64 million dollar follow on question? Hint: it was one that was never asked. A scope clause that would allow 255 DC-9 replacement jets to be operated to the lowest bidder is an epic fail and needs to be reigned in...significantly! Yet that wasn't said at all.
OK fine, but what about the sharing the wealth from the new NYC revenue? This is perhaps the most egregious thing they could have said in the first place because that myopic mentality is the one that caused the 255 DC-9 replacements and hundreds of additional outsourced jets to begin with!
Ergo one could read those letters as "yeah, we're upset too and we were directly lied to and mislead intentionally by the company, but its perfectly legal and all that outsourcing will lead to mainline prosperity!" To put it another way, "yeah, the company lied to us and used us to support their anti mainline plans, but we think there will be revenue from this that we can get a piece of so its all good." Followed by some very vague mention of scope with little to no specifics and there we have it.
Srsly? Yeah, that's basically what was said. We may or may not be OK with massive outsourcing at the RJ50 level, the DC-9-10 level, the 737 level and the A380 level, but hey, its perfectly legal and besides we get all this revenue from sourcing out to the lowest bidder so hey, what's good for the company is good for us.
We could get into numerous layers of expectation management over the last couple years but let's instead just focus on one of the most recent developments.
Let's look at the recent slot swap "mainline massacre" where DALPA and the company worked together to lobby for something that was promoted as significantly helping mainline. Turns out it didn't help mainline as the slot growth was DCI to the tune of 95% or so. And now for the rest of the story: (Paul Harvey all up in hey, ch'all!)
After the "mainline massacre" there were several LEC written statements released on the subject from multipile LEC's including the biggest one that's closest to the action on Va. Ave. While they all said how they were dissapointed and were misled by the company and were promised significantly more mainline growth that we saw, all the letters summarized by stating that not only was everything kosher within our CBA, but this was still good news because it would result in more revenue for the company and we will hopefully get a share of that. Let's break those two things down shall we?
Yes, it is legal IAW our CBA. Duh. But what's the 64 million dollar follow on question? Hint: it was one that was never asked. A scope clause that would allow 255 DC-9 replacement jets to be operated to the lowest bidder is an epic fail and needs to be reigned in...significantly! Yet that wasn't said at all.
OK fine, but what about the sharing the wealth from the new NYC revenue? This is perhaps the most egregious thing they could have said in the first place because that myopic mentality is the one that caused the 255 DC-9 replacements and hundreds of additional outsourced jets to begin with!
Ergo one could read those letters as "yeah, we're upset too and we were directly lied to and mislead intentionally by the company, but its perfectly legal and all that outsourcing will lead to mainline prosperity!" To put it another way, "yeah, the company lied to us and used us to support their anti mainline plans, but we think there will be revenue from this that we can get a piece of so its all good." Followed by some very vague mention of scope with little to no specifics and there we have it.
Srsly? Yeah, that's basically what was said. We may or may not be OK with massive outsourcing at the RJ50 level, the DC-9-10 level, the 737 level and the A380 level, but hey, its perfectly legal and besides we get all this revenue from sourcing out to the lowest bidder so hey, what's good for the company is good for us.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
