El10

B-scale is two people flying the same exact jet on two different pay scales. That's one pilot in a cs100 being paid x and one cs100 pilot being paid y. Just because this rate maybe to low, it is insulting to those that actually flew and fought for the removal of B-scales. Call it "low" or "less", but it is not a b-scale.

Andy

Yes, a Real Man of Genius, like Mr Pro Sports Heckler Guy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x0MbVYVE2A

There are valid arguments to vote no; turning down a TA for a plane's pay rate that may never be on property is not something that I would hinge my vote on.

... could someone please remind me what the pay rates are for CRJ900/EMB190/EMB195 CA compared to widebody FO in our current contract? Where does the CS100 pay rate fall on the TA in comparison to those aircraft?

Dragon7

What if the CS100 rate was $1 more than new WB FO? Howling would ensue. Two popular debates before the TA were getting the NB feed back on property and that it should not pay more than WB FO. Crickets now.

Now it is a "B scale". E190/195, and CS100 all the same pay rate now, more than previous WB FO, less than new WB FO. Would more be better? Of course. But would some of us still take the $20-25 raise to go from 73/320 right seat to left seat of the smaller planes?

Yep.

And just as likely we will get 319s and 737-700s. So be it.

Again, more and more convinced we need to see what the new MEC/NC does before we bet a lot of money on them.

svergin

I heard the same thing at a road show when someone asked about the E-190 rates and said as soon as we voted YES the company would park all the Airbus and 73s and we'd get stuck flying those because the company wants to stick it to us. Guess how many E-190s are on order and how many 73s and Busses we are parking? OH, we are adding even more you say?

This is obviously "niche flying" that we don't do now, and if they do shift down to this in a downturn, as least they are our jobs and not ExpressJet jobs.

Also they can order these and we have to fly them regardless of a yes vote. I'm a no voter, and if you are using this to convince people then you are just going to convince them to vote yes because that's a nonsense argument.

Flytolive

From the Con letter.

From 1979 (after deregulation) to 2002 (prior to bankruptcy) the average yearly cost of the pilots to United Airlines as a percentage of company revenue was 10.85%. Today we find ourselves at 7.5%.
2014 revenue = $38.9 billion
Current cost of pilots to company = $2.92 billion/year
Average cost of pilots to company @ 10.85% = $4.22 billion/year
This equates to an average deficit of $1.3 billion/year in wages and benefits to our pilot group. The TA sent to you is valued at just under $400 million/year.

Not only does the TA come up short of your expectations and direction, but also it fails miserably on the merits of total value. It is reasonable for us to expect more from any deal today. On value alone, the DAL opener stands hundreds of millions of dollars more per year above our TA. Clearly, the new leadership at DAL ALPA understands the leverage we have and how the positive confluence of events has provided us a very strong hand.

This TA does not bring enough value for the amount of leverage we are giving up. You deserve better. The deal was rushed; money was left on the table, and it fails to bring any QOL improvements or capture any additional jobs (an aircraft order). Today, with a single and unified pilot group and the current negotiating environment, our leverage is the strongest. We are recommending a resounding NO VOTE to this TA.

svergin

I agree. But when I tell this to other pilots they say "When Delta gets their payrates, we will get them as well, and then we will be able to see what they got and beat theirs. The entire time we will be getting more money right now."

How do you propose I respond to this? Because this is obviously a possible strategy. And its relatively safe. The pilots I fly with and talk to, they like safe.

bottoms up

Delta won't have a contract by 2018 so I wouldn't worry about the "me too" part of the TA

AllenAllert

You question is not directed to me but I think we need to have a clear reason of why the company wants the TA. Many have signed on to Munoz effect. This is not his deal it was put in place waiting for the right time to implement while Jeff was still here.

Simple question is - WHY does the company want the TA?

Andy

If this TA passes, it also gives DALPA ammunition to get a higher pay rate. Pattern bargaining. I don't think that one should overlook how these pay rates help DALPA get higher pay rates. This TA is low hanging fruit and will help other airline pilots negotiate for higher pay rates.

SpecialTracking

In a full section 6 they just don't negotiate pay rates. Everything has a value and pattern bargaining is essentially on the value of the total contract.

Let's say their pay rates/profit sharing calculation is -$1 to ours but they made measurable gains in in other areas of their contract. We get nothing nada from DAL's me too clause except watch the value of their total contract skyrocket over ours.