New Delta TA 06/2015

[FDJ2]

DAL will make north of 10B by 2017. 10% of the first 2.5 B pays average pilot about 10k. The next 7.5 B pays 20% to employees. About 1.4B. Pilots share of that is 500-600m. That pays Capts about 75k per year and FO 40k per year. Vote that away and get your 5 cent increase in per-diem and have a third party monitor your sick time.

Quote

Hmmmm. profit sharing, let's review the numbers. The first 2.5B is 10% for all employees= $250M, that's unchanged.

The only change is between $2.5B and $6B in PTIX. IOW $3.5B ($6B trigger) pays employees 10%= $350M, which is half of what it would be absent this agreement. Pilots comprise about 1/3rd of the pay roll, so $350M/3= $117m in lost profit sharing for the pilots.
Anything above $6B remains the same.

OTOH, the new contract adds about $1.1-$1.4 billion in solid gains above all the concessions on the books, including profit sharing. Last time I looked there were more zeros in a billion, than a million. But let's look at the cost of delaying ratification over time.

What is the impact of delay on monthly pilot salary?

Initial estimated impact is:

Approximately $500k per day (first 6 months)

Approximately $23.6M per month (first 18 months)

Longer term

$1.3 Billion by end of 2018

But not to worry, airlines don't typically spend 2-3 years in mediation, right?

Just ask a pilot at SWA, FDX, UPS, UAL, or AA.

 

[PCL_128]

Good to see someone is still able to do basic math.

 

[johnsonrod]

I haven't talked to one Delta pilot who is in favor of the TA....

 

[SpauldingSmails]

DAL will make north of 10B by 2017.

Oh, really? What leads you to believe that we will nearly double our profit in two short years? I'd have less concern over the changes to profit sharing if I believed that a sustained profit over $6B was realistic - I'd be shocked if that were in the case. No increments percentage wise from 2.5B - 6B!? I hate to be the party pooper, but we may be in the sweet spot for profitability right now.

We're getting a lot of mixed messages here.

DAL has stated that they're drawing down international capacity toward the end of the year, and possibly reduce domestic capacity. Yet, The Company is dangling Embraers and 739's as carrots (737's are obvious replacements), and TA supporters are claiming that we'll be increasing international capacity (I suppose easily proven correct if you start with a reduction.)

Obviously, DAL is not presently in compliance with the existing EASK language - yet, some are claiming the new JV language will be better for pilots because we then lack a "ceiling." Immediately though, if the TA passes, the "floor" moves to accommodate the present level of flying, and given the dearth of widebody orders - let's say I'm skeptical. 60 total A330/350's arriving, 16 747's departing, plus the gradual retirement of 58 threadbare 767-300ER.

I'm neither a cheerleader, nor a fervent detractor. Pay rates we're largely in line with my expectations. I'd be willing to swallow the changes to PS for the raise. Changes to the JV language, sick policy, FO bidding, and green slips all give me pause. This seems like an awful lot of quid, on what will likely become permanent concessions, for a bit of coin.

Further, where's the fire? I'd like my 60 days to digest and evaluate the TA language. I'd rather risk a pithy 8% raise for one month to be confident in a vote, than stuff $800 and decade worth of regret in my pocket.

 

[Mooneymite]

Profit sharing? More profit sharing? Still more profit sharing?

Oh, no!

When will labor learn?

Profit sharing is for management, not labor! Labor has no ability to control the course of the business. It is out of our control. Pilots do what they do and should be paid just like any other overhead expense.

To tie labor compensation to profits is a huge mistake and will "encentivize" low/no profits. Pilots suffer for dumb management decisions.

No profit sharing for labor....just wages!

Alpa leadership must have started thinking like management. Time for fresh meat.

 

[redflyer65]

Looks like too many losses for the increased payrates you should be getting anyway.

Be interesting to see if people can see thru the concessionary haze to vote no.

 

[jonjuan]

This seems like an awful lot of quid, on what will likely become permanent concessions, for a bit of coin.

Further, where's the fire? I'd like my 60 days to digest and evaluate the TA language. I'd rather risk a pithy 8% raise for one month to be confident in a vote, than stuff $800 and decade worth of regret in my pocket.

Never forget the bold here. The raises are actually 8/0/3/3 when not touching PS from what I've read. funny, they just decided to move the vote deadline from 60 days to 30. Why? 5 days after the new 30 day window, earnings are announced. dalpa claims that it's to get its pilots the $$$ a month quicker. yahoo finance shows that the 737 order is predicated on the TA being approved, yet they claim replacement jets. Right. :roll eyes:

 

[BILL LUMBERG]

Wow Jon....

Where's the black helicopters now? can you see em??

Try calling your rep like I did.....They did this because the contract is structured to start the pay raises July 1 and to avoid the reprogramming issues for the pay computers. There will still be the same amount of roadshows and Family awareness type stuff, according to the reps.

If you need sixty days to decide whether or not you like this thing.....you are illiterate. 30 is just plenty.

 

[jonjuan]

Wow Jon....

Where's the black helicopters now? can you see em??

Try calling your rep like I did.....They did this because the contract is structured to start the pay raises July 1 and to avoid the reprogramming issues for the pay computers.

Lmfao. Gullible lumberg. What's new.

Looks like the poll on and shows 421/56 against (88/12). Yikes! Someone's in the minorty billy.

 

[jonjuan]

SWA guys will laugh at this one:

9. Except as approved by the Delta MEC Chairman, or as otherwise provided by Section 1 E., a carrier engaged in international partner flying will maintain a separate operating and corporate identity from the Company including, but not limited to, name, trade name, logo, livery, trademarks or service marks. The Delta MEC Chairman may, at his option, approve the use by a carrier engaged in international partner flying of a trade name, brand, logo, trademarks, service marks, aircraft livery or aircraft paint scheme currently or in the future utilized by the Company or any Company affiliate.

 

[SIG600]

SWA guys will laugh at this one:

9. Except as approved by the Delta MEC Chairman, or as otherwise provided by Section 1 E., a carrier engaged in international partner flying will maintain a separate operating and corporate identity from the Company including, but not limited to, name, trade name, logo, livery, trademarks or service marks. The Delta MEC Chairman may, at his option, approve the use by a carrier engaged in international partner flying of a trade name, brand, logo, trademarks, service marks, aircraft livery or aircraft paint scheme currently or in the future utilized by the Company or any Company affiliate.

This sounds like an opening shot at foreign outsourcing. Paint the plane in DAL livery, put DAL uniforms on the crew, sell DAL tickets, all on some foreign brand X Airline.

 

[General Lee]

Wow Jon....

Where's the black helicopters now? can you see em??

Try calling your rep like I did.....They did this because the contract is structured to start the pay raises July 1 and to avoid the reprogramming issues for the pay computers. There will still be the same amount of roadshows and Family awareness type stuff, according to the reps.

If you need sixty days to decide whether or not you like this thing.....you are illiterate. 30 is just plenty.

Are you a P2P guy Bill? Do you really believe the stuff you wrote? This TA is being pushed to get it done before that earnings call. Come on now.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[General Lee]

This sounds like an opening shot at foreign outsourcing. Paint the plane in DAL livery, put DAL uniforms on the crew, sell DAL tickets, all on some foreign brand X Airline.

No, they supposedly could do it before, but now the Union MEC Chair can "approve" the changing of names of other subsidiaries etc. It's still a bad TA.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[SIG600]

No, they supposedly could do it before, but now the Union MEC Chair can "approve" the changing of names of other subsidiaries etc. It's still a bad TA.


Bye Bye---General Lee

Just read the MEC chairs disapproval for putting this TA out for vote... Amazing but at least he gets it. I really hope you guys are able to shoot this thing down.

 

[jonjuan]

Just read the MEC chairs disapproval for putting this TA out for vote... Amazing but at least he gets it. I really hope you guys are able to shoot this thing down.

Sounds like he passed the buck and didn't want to take responsibility. Isn't that why he was elected, to vote based on what his constituency wants? Now the alpa sales machine, fud monster will be in overdrive. $1,000 buck says they downplay the massive concessions. IMO, if this is voted down, alpa is done at delta and soon thereafter at ual. They vote it in and alpa just got an immediate 8% increase in dues. Remember, concessions are permanent.
$100 buck says lumberg looked at the 8%, pulled out his calculator, and went "done."

 

[PCL_128]

Just read the MEC chairs disapproval for putting this TA out for vote...

The MEC Chairman is opposed to the TA? You sure you're not talking about an LEC Chairman?

 

[SpauldingSmails]

He must be talking about an LEC Chairman.

MD's message was full of his typical bluster:

"And let me be perfectly clear on one last consideration: These are mature negotiations in which we pulled every trigger, fired every bullet, to deliver every last penny."

 

[jonjuan]

Hate to say it, but they would have been better off by having Pcl negotiating that thing. He would have said, thanks, but no thanks and walked away. Mgmt knew they would never do that so simply said take this final small pay raise and massive concessions because we know you guys better than you do. Loll........

 

[whymeworry?]

This TA falls far short of what you guys deserve. I hope y'all realize that. Though we at UAL can't judge because we voted in our crappy TA and sub-par DAL rates.

Pls vote no, you deserve a larger share of the pie.

 

[SIG600]

He must be talking about an LEC Chairman.

MD's message was full of his typical bluster:

"And let me be perfectly clear on one last consideration: These are mature negotiations in which we pulled every trigger, fired every bullet, to deliver every last penny."

Yeah, my ipad thinks every three letter word lately is MEC.

Anyway, enjoy....

June 11, 2015
(pdf is attached as a viewing option)

Contract 2015 Chairman?s Update #1

Fellow pilots of Council 66,

The MEC voted on the TA in open session yesterday in Atlanta. As you may know by now, the result of the TA vote was 11 for and 8 against. Both NYC reps voted against the TA. It will now proceed to membership ratification, where you will be the final arbiters. More on that soon.

Below is a transcript of the speech that I made to the MEC yesterday during open session. This will provide you a brief look at my reasoning for voting ?No.? I recognize that there is a thirst for information, and we will follow up very shortly with more background for you. In addition to information from your reps, you can count on the Delta MEC administration to provide you with a wealth of information at https://dal.alpa.org. As always, feel free to reach out to me, Chris, or Dave, with your thoughts and concerns.

?Ladies and gentlemen, members of the MEC, and MEC administration,

?I would like to thank the negotiators, the MEC administration, the attorneys, subject-matter experts, and everyone involved in the effort put forth thus far in crafting the TA before us.

?Never in the last 42 years that I have been piloting commercial aircraft have I witnessed a greater spread between the economic climate in which we found ourselves and the resulting agreement. And, that most certainly includes our pre- and post-bankruptcy concessionary contracts.

?We are highly skilled, mission-oriented pilots. We are, in my estimation and the company?s as well, the finest pilots on the planet. Our hard work should be rewarding us, not demanding that we be granting the company relief. We have before us the best negotiating environment in our careers; multiple record-breaking profits; incredibly high load factors. The timing is right for an historic contract. We raised expectations, sure, in our opener and in our communications?are we guilty of over-promising and under-delivering? I?ll leave that up to you to decide.

?The pilots of Delta Air Lines have spoken loudly to us?in crew lounges, at meetings, in multiple surveys and out flying the line. These pilots have given greatly to save this airline, and they have told us loud and clear that now is the time for payback.

?But perhaps we are missing the point.

?This agreement isn?t about money or scope or sick leave. This agreement is about respect. Respect from the company and self-respect for ourselves. Agreeing to this TA means we accept the notion that management has little respect for our past sacrifices and the professional job we do day in and day out. Agreeing to this TA means we have lost our own self-respect for our skills and dedication. We will chase a pay rate, and abandon benefits and quality of life, just to get to that shiny number. And frankly, the pay rate ain?t all that shiny.

?Look closely at this agreement. The devil is in the details.

?With great thanks for all those involved in its crafting, my belief is that accepting a TA that is marginal at best will haunt us for years to come. It?s time we stopped bluffing. Management has overreached, and we must not validate their overreach. In good faith to both the pilots I represent and all the pilots of Delta Air Lines, I must vote ?No? on this TA.

?I vowed to follow a clear process from the start. In keeping with that promise, I can?t accept a TA that clearly does not meet the mandate of this pilot group. The pilots? mandate and the direction given to the negotiators never included making drastic sacrifices to important sections of our contract during such prosperous times.

?For those around the horseshoe who want to reject it but plan to pass it along to the pilots to ?let them decide,? I ask, ?What purpose do you serve? Why have an MEC??

?This body?s credibility is at stake every time we forward a TA to our fellow pilots. We are the first arbiters after the negotiators and must not abdicate our solemn duty.

?This TA should sell itself, and common sense says it cannot. It under-delivers. It would take a full court press, with a very slim chance of getting this thing across the finish line. It shouldn?t be so. It must not be so.

?Thank you for the privilege of addressing you.?

Respectfully,


Chairman
Council 66


?Member Driven?







Air Line Pilots Association, International