Consessions vs furloughs

[enigma]

csmith

Look, you are either overmanned or you're not. Delta wants to cut capacity. If they
cut capacity, they do not need as many pilots.
........................................................................................

Changes are in the works, and you are apparently not in the know just how far the Delta
pilots have gone to help their own. How exactly is it "obvious to you that Delta needs
pilots in mainline equipment, just not at the current wage scale"?

..........................................................................................................
You are a closet managementist. You want to decouple productivity from wages. .
....................................................................
but IMO you have very little idea of what you are talking about. The question remains,
Delta has not and will not come to the pilots and say, "if you take XX pay cut we will not
furlough XX pilots." Why?


.........................................................................

In short, I wouldn't. I also can't believe what I am reading. We are not management, we
are laborers. As soon as you realize that, you will be better off. Our pay should not be
tied to company performance. IT AFFECTS SAFETY.
.........................................................................................

This thread has become totally out of control.
................................................................................
Unbelievable.

Point one. IF DAL wants too cut capacity, then why are they talking about starting
another narrowbody carrier?

Two. See point one. What part of the connection between increasing capacity on a "B"
scale subsidiary and decreasing capacity on old mainline DAL am I missing? It seems to me that the only difference between the new subsidiary and DAL mainline will be labor rates. Rates that will have to be lower across the board. The new subsidiary will not pay lower landing fees, nor lower parts costs, nor lower fuel costs, nor lower Pepsi costs, nor lower insurance costs, etc. So why bother to start a new subsidiary?

Three. I am not a closet managementist. I am a free market advocate who tries to utilize the knowledge I was forced to learn in order to gain the degree that would enable me to show that I was DAL material. I tend to follow Ludwig von Mises and Walter Williams in economic thought. I am commenting upon what appears to be economic reality. Whether or not you agree won't change the facts, and they are that your carrier is changing to
accomodate market forces. I am not arguing for any sort of change, just commenting on the changes that are occuring.

Four, they haven't come and asked for a paycut vs furlough because they can do it without you. They appear to be doing it without you. That's what this whole string is about. I suspect that management would rather have a seperate group because it makes it easier to whipsaw you. Remember, I am not advocating a certain course of action, just observing the possible.

Five, In short your pay is tied to company performance. Just how much pay are the Braniff/PanAm/Eastern/etc, pilots drawing at the present?
As soon as you realize that DAL doesn't exist in a vacuum, you will be better off.

Six, Why would you say that the thread is out of control? I see a group of reasonable adults debating a topic. In such a forum, you are expected to defend your positions. Nothing more, nothing less. If you don't want to enter in, you don't have to.
Matter of absolute fact. If you want a thread to die, then don't respond. This bbs has so much activity that a boring, worthless, uninteresting thread won't stay on the front page for more than twelve hours. After that no one thinks it's worth reading.

Last, what's unbelievable to me is the way you would characterize a thread in which you are a significant contributor as "out of control". I thought we were debating an issue. I
offered, you responded. Did you think that we would just silently bow out once you had shown us where we were wrong? I will bow out loudly, when I have been convinced that I am wrong. As I have before. Give me enough information and you have a good chance of convincing me. Part of the reason I post is to increase my knowledge and understanding.
As steel sharpens steel, as I believe the saying goes.

regards
8N

 

[csmith]

Re: csmith

Point one. IF DAL wants too cut capacity, then why are they talking about starting

Two. See point one. What part of the connection between increasing capacity on a "B" It seems to me that the only difference between the new subsidiary and DAL mainline will be labor rates. Rates that will have to be lower across the board. The new subsidiary will not pay lower landing fees, nor lower parts costs, nor lower fuel costs, nor lower Pepsi costs, nor lower insurance costs, etc. So why bother to start a new subsidiary?

Four, they haven't come and asked for a paycut vs furlough because they can do it without you. They appear to be doing it without you. That's what this whole string is about. I suspect that management would rather have a seperate group because it makes it easier to whipsaw you. Remember, I am not advocating a certain course of action, just observing the possible.

Five, In short your pay is tied to company performance. Just how much pay are the Braniff/PanAm/Eastern/etc, pilots drawing at the present?

What does it accomplish to quote me and offer little or no anecdotal evidence to prove your point?

I have explained what one of the premier reasons for starting a new subsidiary-to detach the Delta name from "low cost". Your assertion that "they can do it without you" is incorrect. On any carrier with a/c over 70 seats, they have to use Delta pilots. Once again, they have to use Delta pilots. WWW.DALPA.COM you can view a copy of the contract. They will need the Delta pilots' blessing to pull this one off. The savings could very well come in the form of outsourced mtx, gate, ramp, and FAs. The chief pilot's office insists that flight crews would not be outsourced. Lower parts costs, leases, training, etc could very well be part of a deal with any a/c producer, so that statement is also incorrect. With all of the aircraft parked in the desert, do you honestly think we could not get a good deal from, say, Airbus regarding the aforementioned?!?

Additionally, comparing current Delta to the Braniffs, Easterns, PanAms is a bit, uh, extreme--don't you think? I will reiterate my point. The logic behind tying pilot pay to performance is a safety issue and completely inappropriate. The "out of control" statement referred directly to this line of reasoning. You can do it at your carrier if you want to push that, but kindly leave my carrier out of it. I mention safety and pilot pay being linked with company performance as being mutually exclusive, and you pull Eastern, Braniff, and PanAm out of the bag. WTFO? That is just more insanity. Sorry, but I can't think of a more PC way of putting it. It is a conflict of interest to link the two.

Finally, I contribute to threads primarily to correct misinformation which others put out. In this particular instance, you have implied that Delta pilots have not done enough to mitigate furloughs. Others, anti-Delta pilot types, have jumped on your bandwagon. You don't need more information to see that some of your arguments are just plain headed the wrong direction. If you don't have the information to make the argument, then the responisble thing to do is not open the can of worms in the first place. If you open that can, and are wrong, you are bound to be corrected.

Edited to make the link work.

 

[michael707767]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Et Al

In the 90's, the Delta pilots could have worked for free, and Delta still would have lost money. I would say we are nearing that point now in the 2000s. Are my services worth any less now because Delta is losing money? The free market may say yes, I say no. My contract says no, and my opinion now says let a judge say otherwise--but I am still listening. If I am wrong, and Delta goes under, it will be one of the last--if not the last--to do so. C

As a Delta pilot, I agree with you, my services are not worth less now that Delta is loosing money. However, I accept the reality that what I feel I am worth, and what the company is capable of paying, are two totally seperate things. Like it or not, the ability of the company to pay is more important than what we think we are worth. Will labor costs be the only thing that make or break an airline? No. But we need to get over the idea that what we make has zero impact on the bottom line.

 

[Publishers]

Leo

If I were Leo, I would make this a subsiderary of Comair or one o fthe other carriers. Might spin off Comair and replace with the new entitiy.

What does your contract say about that

 

[enigma]

Re: Re: csmith

What does it accomplish to quote me and offer little or no anecdotal evidence to prove your point?

WTFO? That is just more insanity.

Finally, I contribute to threads primarily to correct misinformation which others put out. In this particular instance, you have implied that Delta pilots have not done enough to mitigate furloughs. Others, anti-Delta pilot types, have jumped on your bandwagon. You don't need more information to see that some of your arguments are just plain headed the wrong direction. If you don't have the information to make the argument, then the responisble thing to do is not open the can of worms in the first place. If you open that can, and are wrong, you are bound to be corrected.

Edited to make the link work.

ALL of the evidence I have offered is anecdotal. I don't believe you know the definition of anecdotal. Had I had anything but anecdotal evidence (ie, factual evidence), I would have put you away long ago.

If your statement about arguments heading in the wrong direction made any sense, I could better respond.

So, now I'm insane. Another word that you lack proper understanding of. So much for having a reasoned debate.

I will open any can of worms I choose. Your choice is to use this open forum to prove me wrong. I don't have the least desire to make you look bad, prove you wrong, correct you, etc. I have no problem with being corrected. But you have yet to correct me. Called me crazy, yes. Corrected me no.

I continue sparring with you, because of the hundreds of others that read this board. I have no desire to change your mind, nor fight with you. I will let the others judge if I have made cogent arguments.

Peace.
8N

To the "others" the last sentence is not intended to encourage you to post either support or opposition. Please refrain from keeping this alive. Anyone who wants to continue a reasoned debate, Let me have it.

 

[enigma]

Re: Leo

If I were Leo, I would make this a subsiderary of Comair or one o fthe other carriers. Might spin off Comair and replace with the new entitiy.

What does your contract say about that

Just to prove that I'm not management material, I hadn't even thought of that. Such a move would start a whipsaw of monumental proportions.

This could force the RJDC to go with my idea and change their name. Maybe the 737"B"scaleDC, would be appropriate.

regards,
8N

 

[csmith]

Re: Re: Re: csmith

ALL of the evidence I have offered is anecdotal. I don't believe you know the definition of anecdotal. Had I had anything but anecdotal evidence (ie, factual evidence), I would have put you away long ago.

If your statement about arguments heading in the wrong direction made any sense, I could better respond.

So, now I'm insane. Another word that you lack proper understanding of. So much for having a reasoned debate.

I will open any can of worms I choose. Your choice is to use this open forum to prove me wrong. I don't have the least desire to make you look bad, prove you wrong, correct you, etc. I have no problem with being corrected. But you have yet to correct me. Called me crazy, yes. Corrected me no.

I continue sparring with you, because of the hundreds of others that read this board. I have no desire to change your mind, nor fight with you. I will let the others judge if I have made cogent arguments.

Peace.
8N

To the "others" the last sentence is not intended to encourage you to post either support or opposition. Please refrain from keeping this alive. Anyone who wants to continue a reasoned debate, Let me have it.

I guess we are done since you fail to address the meat of the issue an only choose to assert your rights--sure sign of no aurgment. I don't know how to make my posts more clear, I cited examples, I explained in detail. I don't know what part of a "reasoned debate" you really expect I guess, perhaps the incorrect choice of a word while I am typing at a mile a minute. Good one. Center in on the typing skills, kinda like the guys who make an argument of misspelling. Do you have any rebuttals to my explanations or not?

 

[csmith]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Et Al

As a Delta pilot, I agree with you, my services are not worth less now that Delta is loosing money. However, I accept the reality that what I feel I am worth, and what the company is capable of paying, are two totally seperate things. Like it or not, the ability of the company to pay is more important than what we think we are worth. Will labor costs be the only thing that make or break an airline? No. But we need to get over the idea that what we make has zero impact on the bottom line.

We may very well be headed that direction, Michael. Don't get me wrong, if the company needs help I'll be the first one in line. We will never know if the company needs help or not. They will never let us see the true numbers. Last time, the Delta pilots were sold a bill of goods, and the company turned around in record fashion. When the company is losing money, they want concessions. When times are good, and we want it back, they tell us to go pound sand. As the son of an accountant, i can tell you that there are many ways to legally cook books. The company has an agenda right now. They want government help, again, and IMO they want consolidation. To get both, the books have to look as bad as possible. Of course this is the perfect chance to take a shot at labor as well.

If I may, in physical terms, what do you mean with the statement,"we need to get over the idea that what we make has zero impact on the bottom line."

 

[csmith]

Re: Leo

If I were Leo, I would make this a subsiderary of Comair or one o fthe other carriers. Might spin off Comair and replace with the new entitiy.

What does your contract say about that

Depends on how big the airplane is on the subsidiary.

 

[Publishers]

carrier

Frankly, I do not think that your contract even deals with Comair creating an new company as a partner.

 

[michael707767]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Et Al

We may very well be headed that direction, Michael. Don't get me wrong, if the company needs help I'll be the first one in line. We will never know if the company needs help or not. They will never let us see the true numbers. Last time, the Delta pilots were sold a bill of goods, and the company turned around in record fashion. When the company is losing money, they want concessions. When times are good, and we want it back, they tell us to go pound sand. As the son of an accountant, i can tell you that there are many ways to legally cook books. The company has an agenda right now. They want government help, again, and IMO they want consolidation. To get both, the books have to look as bad as possible. Of course this is the perfect chance to take a shot at labor as well.

If I may, in physical terms, what do you mean with the statement,"we need to get over the idea that what we make has zero impact on the bottom line."

C,
I agree with almost everything you said. We will never see the real numbers. Unfortunately, there is an unhealthy relationship between management and ALPA. Thats too bad and I wish it was not that way. I blame both sides for that though. Yes there are many ways to legally cook the books. I went to the road show in PTC the other day, and I have no doubt Fred put the absolute worst spin he could on everything. However, even if things are not as bad as he said, things right now are still very bad.

To answer your last question, unfortunately, I think many Delta pilots feel like what we make has no impact on the profits or losses of the company. It is true that as a percentage of total costs, pilot pay is not as big a factor as some people make it out to be. But, the total costs of the pilots are a factor, however big or small.

 

[enigma]

Re: Re: Re: Re: csmith

I guess we are done since you fail to address the meat of the issue an only choose to assert your rights--sure sign of no aurgment. I don't know how to make my posts more clear, I cited examples, I explained in detail. I don't know what part of a "reasoned debate" you really expect I guess, perhaps the incorrect choice of a word while I am typing at a mile a minute. Good one. Center in on the typing skills, kinda like the guys who make an argument of misspelling. Do you have any rebuttals to my explanations or not?

Sorry, Dude. I ignore typo's, misspellings, etc. Your words are not typos. You used specific words, words mean things to quote that distinguished American, Rush Limbaugh. I guess that you really didn't mean to type insane, you must have meant to use crazy.

I have addressed the meat of the issue. I started the string. The issue is that some of you say (paraphrase) that giving concessions to avoid furloughs doesn't matter because DAL has room for only so many pilots, and the concessions won't ensure jobs. On the other hand, DAL is entertaining the idea of starting up a low cost subsidiary to fly mainline size aircraft.The disparity between those two facts is the issue. Any other is stuff you threw in to muddy the water.

I'm done
8N

 

[csmith]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: csmith

Sorry, Dude. I ignore typo's, misspellings, etc. Your words are not typos. You used specific words, words mean things to quote that distinguished American, Rush Limbaugh. I guess that you really didn't mean to type insane, you must have meant to use crazy.

I have addressed the meat of the issue. I started the string. The issue is that some of you say (paraphrase) that giving concessions to avoid furloughs doesn't matter because DAL has room for only so many pilots, and the concessions won't ensure jobs. On the other hand, DAL is entertaining the idea of starting up a low cost subsidiary to fly mainline size aircraft.The disparity between those two facts is the issue. Any other is stuff you threw in to muddy the water.

I'm done
8N

Rush Limbaugh? I guess that explains a lot. Another pilot who thinks republicans are on our side. No wonder.

As for "starting the string", starting a thread with incorrect information does not make you correct in your assumptions. As yet another example, a deal was worked out to pay pilots a certain number of hours a month to stay home with no obligation. The union thought it might be a way to mitigate furloughs. The company said it would not. Here we are still furloughing. Paying pilots less money does not mitigate furloughs here at Delta.

Now for the LCC. I have addressed this as well. I don't know where you get your information, but how about this piece from Fred Reid--I'm sure you know who he is:"

"We expect to ask for no hourly rate concessions from the Delta pilots who fly our new LCC operation. We aren't sure how we are going to handle the flight attendants."


It would appear as if they not only plan on using Delta pilots--for Publisher--but they plan on paying them Delta rates. One thing we may lose, as he specifically said pay rates, is work rules. Although you and I have not discussed this, it is this arena where Delta loses money over other airlines the most, IMO. I routinely fly a 4 day trip for about 17-18 hours of "hard time", yet I am paid for 5:30 per day. This provision was put into the contract to ensure efficiency. Yet the company has not scheduled 22 or more hours of hard flying. Bottom line, you may see a LCC, but it will probably have built in efficiencies rather than lower pay rates. Of course, management has led us astray before...

There is much more, but I'll leave it here as this is post has just been more fodder to muddy the water. Sorry to have offended you.

C

--still thinks the idea of tying pilot salary to company performance adversely affects safety--thereby making the idea insane

 

[csmith]

Re: carrier

Frankly, I do not think that your contract even deals with Comair creating an new company as a partner.

As Delta Inc. owns Comair, anything that company does must be done within the framework of the Delta pilots' PWA. I see where you are headed with this, but they can't go there with larger aircraft. Well, there might be a very obscure way, but it must not be cost effective as it doesn't appear that the company is headed in that direction--especially with 1,000 pilots that will have to be dealt with at one time or another.

C

--can only pray he used the words "cost effective" correctly

 

[csmith]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Et Al

To answer your last question, unfortunately, I think many Delta pilots feel like what we make has no impact on the profits or losses of the company. It is true that as a percentage of total costs, pilot pay is not as big a factor as some people make it out to be. But, the total costs of the pilots are a factor, however big or small.

I agree with you that there are some extremists. Some might even consider me one of them. That being said, IMO, it is a cost of doing business. As of now, there is no way aorund pilots, you have to have them to operate an airline. Furthermore, I recently read where Mr. Mullin has been quoted as saying that we are consistently cash flow positive. That is certainly a step in the right direction. Then the "write offs" step in. It seems as if I remember TK saying he was an accountant. Maybe he can shed some light on how our accounting practices can affect the bottom line.

I guess I am just not to the point yet of being ready to open up our contract for changes in compensation. I am certainly aware that cuts will help the bottom line, and gouges would help it even more. As soon as it would be in writing, however, I would not be at all surprised to see the economy turn around and profits start rolling in, and more pilots furloughed due to this FM or another yet undisclosed FM. In this manner, I disagree with you that the union has a hand in the employee/employer relationship. The early 90's took care of the Ron Allen era, and the infamous quote from LM took care of his era. Good faith seems to be lopsided at this company, IMO.