DALPA retirement TA

[thruthemurk]

Section 20 B. 1.[/b], however, his position on the seniority list will be adjusted to place him below the most junior pilot on the seniority list who is not a post-retirement pilot, while maintaining the relative seniority among post-retirement pilots as reflected on the September 1, 2004, seniority list.

This doesn't really ring true if the returning pilots are flying Captain on the 777 and 767-400, does it? Will they be reserve pilots on the bottom of their respective lists? Will the company continue to open bids for Captain slots on these equip types that show deficits in manning when the PRP's are not included.

Interesting precedent that is not a precedent.

 

[FDJ2]

This doesn't really ring true if the returning pilots are flying Captain on the 777 and 767-400, does it? Will they be reserve pilots on the bottom of their respective lists? Will the company continue to open bids for Captain slots on these equip types that show deficits in manning when the PRP's are not included.

Interesting precedent that is not a precedent.

It looks as if the PRPs will actually be the most junior pilots on the Delta seniority list. They will also be on the bottom of their respective category list.

Often times a junior pilot will hold a more senior seat position pending their displacement by a more senior pilot. This normally happens when categories are downsized. In this case, the RFPs will effectively be those junior pilots awaiting displacement. Furthermore, the company will be obligated to keep the training pipeline full in order to displace the PRPs as soon as possible.

No Negative Effect on Staffing and Recalls

a. The Company will not permit the employment of a post-retirement pilot to delay or limit the Company’s actions necessary to staff that position at levels adequate to fulfill the marketing schedule for the applicable equipment model. For example,

1) The Company will post and award bids for vacancies (including contingent vacancies), and will train pilots at no lesser rate than if there were no post-retirement pilots.

 

[General Lee]

There is ALWAYS a rush to see the NEGATIVE parts of any agreement, without actually seeing that WITHOUT AN AGREEMENT---there could be much worse. Believe me, I want all of our furloughs back fast---that has always been my beef here. I also want there to be a company for them to come back to and for me to fly at. This agreement was put on the express train because Grinstein warned of an impending Chap 11 if a bunch of our pilots all left at once, and it seems like that could be the case with all of the negative talk out there. If that happens, we WOULD have to park a bunch of our large equipment, and that WOULD NOT help our current situation. It seems like this agreement benefits everyone a little bit, and isn't great for everyone at the same time. It might not bring back the furloughs as fast as they want to come back, but at the same time---it FORCES guys to throw in their paperwork if they want to keep their lump sums---something they worked VERY HARD to produce---usually over many years of flying. You have to balance that-----one group will NOT benefit over another. Yeah, I want to fly the 777 someday soon, but that 777 Capt would probably like to continue flying that plane also. No easy answer here, but I will probably go with keeping the fleet flying.



Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Freddie Spencer]

our current situation.



Bye Bye--General Lee

What do ya mean with "our current situation"? Didn't the summer loads, spring break loads, Athens loads, fuel hedging, Song and 3 NY airports, billions of dollars in cash help you to avoid "our current situation"?

 

[General Lee]

Freddie,


I thought it would. I never originally thought high fuel costs(we gave up our fuel hedging contracts last FEB) would venture in there, and that negated a lot of any possible profits this Summer. We still have high debt payments to pay soon, and that is why the union is delaying--so all the parties can go in together and get this done. If we had "folded" our cards too soon, the creditors etc would not have joined the party. That is the truth. It looks like this will be brought down to the wire, with a good conclusion hopefully.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[TonyC]

The whole problem could be equitably resolved by one promise from Delta management: we won't disolve the pension plan.


That wouldn't even require a membership vote.




Instead, they've said "we won't dissolve the pension plan before February, but you've got to give us a few things. First of all, we want to be able to contract pilots.


Genearal - - you said "I don't think they know what they are going to do two weeks from now." I think you should give them more credit than that. I'm guessing they have a plan through at least Feb '05.


.

 

[General Lee]

Tony C,


I was joking with that statement. You should know that after reading my posts. As far as saying the pensions would be ok, the problem is that we are underfunded--maybe not the pilot pensions---but all the pensions here at Delta. To the tune of $7 billion dollars. So, Delta will want to fix that problem. You can't just tell the senior guys "we will protect only the top 2000 guys...." or the rest will get mad. What about the guy who is 2001 in seniority? It gets really complex, and I think Grinstein would love to switch over to a cash balance plan that would give a lump sum when you retire---and that is it. Our underfunded pension would change overnight. The only problem is the "dead zone" pilots that are 47-49 years old--that can't qualify for early retirement (must be atleast 50), and are probably too old to make up the difference with a cash balance plan. So, to say the least it is very complex, and you just can't please everyone---and we are kinda in a hole right now anyway.....


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[TonyC]

. . . You can't just tell the senior guys "we will protect only the top 2000 guys...." or the rest will get mad. What about the guy who is 2001 in seniority? It gets really complex, . . .

Well, what do you do about the guy that can't retire until March `05? This doesn't make that problem go away, it just shifts the target. Some guys get relief, and some guys get screwed.


The immediate problem, the one that has Delta's attention, is the exodus of senior pilots.



Admit the root of that problem is lack of confidence in the future of the pension plan. Find a solution that targets the problem rather than bandaid some symptoms. THEN you'll have a solution that everyone can support.


It would seem that a great deal of the reported problems with Defined Benefit pension plans is due to artificially imposed restrictions that could easily be adjusted to make them very "healthy." I don't buy the doom and gloom hype companies are so inclined to pitch these days.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but I reckon Delta 59-yr-olds have 2 choices right now. They can give 24-hour notice and walk away with 1 50% (of something) lump sum, or they hang around longer and gamble on the traditional defined benefit pension.

Don't you think you could put your noggin' to work and come up with some OTHER alternative, some incentive to keep the senior guys around flying, even if it's only long enough to train replacements?

I've got an idea. Change the notification requirement from 24 hours to 180 days. In return, the Company guarantees the lump sum will be available at the end of the 180 days, even if the Company declares bankruptcy. This way pilots aren't in a panic to exercise their lump sum option, and the Company has plenty of notice to replace retirees.


Any other ideas?

 

[General Lee]

Tony C,


That is a good idea, and that was brought up---with the 60 or 90 day notice, but the company did NOT require that. That is strange..... I think they want to get rid of the top half. They want cheaper pilots, and if they deplete the retirement plan (it is 80% funded now), then they won't have to disolve it later. Then we crank up hiring, and we have 2nd year guys flying 767s again, at $65 an hour ( or whatever is the new negotiated rate is) I bet they would love to do that with the old stews, but age discrimination doesn't allow that---so they close senior bases and make it harder for people during trips. I flew with a crew that had an ATL--LAX turn---but my leg was their return leg--which was an allnighter back to ATL. It was worth 9 hours and they looked terrible, and for most of them it was their third consecutive trip like this. And, they were senior---because most stews now have atleast 3 "A" days on reserve(even the senior ones---the junior ones can have 9 A days I believe)---and on those days the company works them HARD.


Well, that's all for tonight. Tomorrow will bring more great news I bet!


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[TonyC]

That is a good idea, and that was brought up---with the 60 or 90 day notice, but the company did NOT require that. That is strange...

Shouldn't that tell you something? Shouldn't alarm bells be going off? Sounds like the Company is being less than forthcoming with you.

.. I think they want to get rid of the top half. They want cheaper pilots

And it looks like this TA would help them do just that. And I fail to see what tangible benefit the pilot force as a whole will gain in return. And there will be division among the remianing pilots to boot. And that will play well leading into the next round of negotiations.

And... I guess it's my bedtime, too.

 

[xdays]

I've got an idea. Change the notification requirement from 24 hours to 180 days. In return, the Company guarantees the lump sum will be available at the end of the 180 days, even if the Company declares bankruptcy. This way pilots aren't in a panic to exercise their lump sum option, and the Company has plenty of notice to replace retirees.


Any other ideas?

Just brainstorming here, but isn't that effectively what this T/A accomplishes? It states the company will not terminate the pension plan prior to Feb. 2005. While that isn't 180 days, it gives the company relief from the 24 hour notice requirement, allowing a more orderly filling of vacancies.

 

[vc10]

Untrue. The US Airways MEC (dominated by a roll-call majority of hardliners) instructed its NC to go back to US Airways management with an old contract proposal that management had previously rejected. That's not negotiation. Management didn't "just decide". Its decision was not whimsical or capricious. US Airways had payments that it had to make that week that it couldn't afford to make. There's scarcely a US Airways employee who did not expect management to make that filing that weekend. It came as a surprise to almost no one.

Let us not forget -- Management can declare bankruptcy at ANY time. Just look at USAir. The pilot group was negotiating with the company when management decided to just declare Bankruptcy on a Sunday.

 

[vc10]

Keep you out of Ch 11. That's the tangible benefit.

And I fail to see what tangible benefit the pilot force as a whole will gain in return.

 

[av8n]

VC10 states

Untrue. The US Airways MEC (dominated by a roll-call majority
of hardliners) instructed its NC to go back to US Airways
management with an old contract proposal that management had
previously rejected. That's not negotiation. Management didn't
"just decide". Its decision was not whimsical
or capricious. US Airways had payments that it had to make
that week that it couldn't afford to make. There's scarcely a
US Airways employee who did not expect management to make that
filing that weekend. It came as a surprise
to almost no one.


You state that managment didn't decide to go into Bankruptcy. So you are saying the USAir pilot group declared bankruptcy? The pilot group went down to the courthouse to file the Bankruptcy paper work on Sunday?

The pilot group is not in control of if/when bankruptcy is filed. It is soley at Management's discretion. No TA signed by a pilot group can guarantee the bankruptcy can't be filed by Managment.

Concerning the precident set -- When a Bankruptcy Judge sees what has been agreed to by the pilot group and managment, the judge can now use the latest TA as a precident for future banruptcy proceedings. The Judge can override whatever is agreed to on paper by the Union and Managment. Once Bankruptcy is declared -- All bet's are off. This is the opening of pandora's box.

 

[TonyC]

Just brainstorming here, but isn't that effectively what this T/A accomplishes? It states the company will not terminate the pension plan prior to Feb. 2005. While that isn't 180 days, it gives the company relief from the 24 hour notice requirement, allowing a more orderly filling of vacancies.

Not exactly. The TA would protect the pension plan until Feb`05 - - the change in notification would protect each retiring pilot's pension until he retires. The 180 notification would run indefinitely, while the benefit of the TA expires 5 months from now. The TA does not relieve the Company from the 24 hour notice, it just instantly gives them a contract employee to backfill and a new seniority list to put them on. The TA encourages all those eligible to bail before Feb `05 (or Jan `05, I suppose), whereas 180-day notification might allow the retitements to be spread out over a longer time frame, allowing the training pipeline to actually keep up with retirements. The TA allows manning up to 110% with said contract employees. What incentive is there to recall more furloughees when a position is manned to 110%?


vc10: I understand that the purpose of the whole exercise is to keep you out of Chapter 11 bankruptcy. My point referenced additional concessions that are thrown in for free. The Company needs to retain senior pilots - - great, we all recognize that. What does that have to do with allowing furloughs? (That's the first cherry a Bankruptcy court can pick, if the TA passes, without ever having to touch the rest of the contract. Not that they couldn't wipe out the whole contract anyway, but why make it easier on 'em?) How does manning to 110% with Post-Retirement Contract Pilots serve that purpose? How does the establishment of a separate seniority list serve that purpose? If they can guarantee the lumps-sum at all, why can't they guarantee it to Captains who agree to 180-day notice instead of 24-hours?


When I asked about tangible benefit, I fully realize that the PRIMARY benefit is retaining bodies in seats and keeping airplanes flying. When I asked the question, I was referring to the additional concessions wrapped up in the package. What's the benefit, to the pilot, of those? I don't see it.


But, to be fair, I don't see the TA either. Y'all have 23 pages worth, and I have but a few paragraphs of message line and e-mail. Therefore, having voiced my opinion about what I DO know, I think I might better step to the sidelines and let those with more information participate in the more meaningful discussions.

Good Luck.

We're all counting on you !

 

[FDJ2]

The TA allows manning up to 110% with said contract employees.

Tony, the TA allows post retirement pilots if manning falls below 110% of regular lines not 110% of the manning formula. That is only 1 reserve line for every 10 regular lines. That is not enough to typically man a category, particularly a senior category, when you consider supplemental regular lines (44 for october in my ATL 767 F/O category) which are formed after the original regular lines are awarded from some of the remaining trips in the pot, sick leave, vacations, training, etc.

You might also note that post retirement pilots will be Delta seniority list pilots and they will work under the terms and conditions of the Delta PWA, which contractors would not.

Additionally, the Delta MEC can terminate the use of post retirement delta pilots after giving the company 7 days notice.

The TA also mandates that the company is required to continue the recall schedule and can not delay the recall of furloughed pilots while using PRPs, or furlough additional pilots.

What incentive is there to recall more furloughees when a position is manned to 110%?

Under the terms of the TA, Delta is required to post advance entitlements and award contingency bids to fill the position occupied by PRPs. The training rate can not be any slower than if the PRPs were not available. There is of course a historical record of late on just how fast DAL can train pilots in these categories. You only have to look at the last year to see what the maximum training rate can be for these categories.

Additionally, whenever the company uses PRPs, pilots with an advance entitlement bid for that category, who can hold that category will be pay protected. IOW, if an MD88 Captain has the seniority to hold the 767 and he has a bid in for that position while the company is using a PRP in that position, the MD88 captain will be paid 767 rates. That is quite an incentive.

 

[ATR-DRIVR]

FDJ2,

I was under the impression that the training dept is operating at about 50% percent of what it was some years ago. Can it not be brought back up to what it was before? Several posters have said alot of the sim time has been sold to other entities, MD-11 etc. I would think the training situation would be a VERY high priority for both DL and the pilot group.

 

[xdays]

Not exactly. The TA would protect the pension plan until Feb`05 - - the change in notification would protect each retiring pilot's pension until he retires. The 180 notification would run indefinitely, while the benefit of the TA expires 5 months from now. The TA does not relieve the Company from the 24 hour notice, it just instantly gives them a contract employee to backfill and a new seniority list to put them on. The TA encourages all those eligible to bail before Feb `05 (or Jan `05, I suppose), whereas 180-day notification might allow the retitements to be spread out over a longer time frame, allowing the training pipeline to actually keep up with retirements. The TA allows manning up to 110% with said contract employees. What incentive is there to recall more furloughees when a position is manned to 110%?[/QUOTE

Of course Tony, you are correct with regards to the effect of a permanent contractual change calling for a 180 day notification period with regards to retirement. I was merely addressing the T/A, which has a drop dead date. Personally, I think the current contract language allowing a pilot to retire on 24 hours notice handcuffs the company and should be changed. With regard to your interpretation of the T/A allowing manning to 110% with contract employees, that is incorrect. Once manning falls below 110% of the regular lines in a given category the company can employ retireing pilots in that category only. Also, if ALPA believes the company is taking advantae of the spirit of the T/A it can void the agreement after, I believe, January 2005. I'm not sure on that date.

 

[FDJ2]

FDJ2,

I was under the impression that the training dept is operating at about 50% percent of what it was some years ago. Can it not be brought back up to what it was before? Several posters have said alot of the sim time has been sold to other entities, MD-11 etc. I would think the training situation would be a VERY high priority for both DL and the pilot group.

ATR, 50% of the training department instructors were let go, not so much to reduce training capacity, but rather because traditional ground school instruction has been replaced with home study and a CD-ROM. Sim time is another factor to be considered. Last month Delta experienced 103 retirements and so far this month 85 pilots have submitted their retirement package. IOW we are on track to have over 100 retirements again this month. That's over one years retirements in only 2 months. It's not just a matter of training 200 pilots to replace the retired pilots, these retirements off the top of the seniority list have a large ripple effect. For example, let's say 200 767 Captains retire, then 200 737-800 Captains move up to the 767, then 200 MD-88 Captains move up to the 737-800, then 200 767-er F/Os move up to 88 CA, then 200 767 F/O move up to the 767er, which then makes 200 MD-88 F/Os move up to the 767 etc.. It is estimated that for each senior captain who retires, 6 advanced entitlements are awarded and 6 training events are scheduled. That means Delta has to train 1,200 pilots as a result of 2 months worth of retirements. That's 16% of active Delta pilots every 2 months at this rate. And oh by the way, that means that 16% of active Delta pilots will not be actively flying the line while their in training.

IOW, Delta does not have the sim time available (on the 767-400 there are only 3 sims in the entire world) to train 1,200 pilots every two months and Delta certainly can not replace 100 senior Captains within the one day notice window the company is given.

Due to the way that our pensions are structured (50% paid in a lump sum and limited notice) and the threat of BK and pension termination, Delta has a unique problem that requires a unique solution. Often times ALPA is criticized for not thinking outside the box, but that charge most certainly can not be leveled at this TA.

 

[TonyC]

The TA allows manning up to 110% with said contract employees.

Tony, the TA allows post retirement pilots if manning falls below 110% of regular lines not 110% of the manning formula.

. . .


Additionally, the Delta MEC can terminate the use of post retirement delta pilots after giving the company 7 days notice.

Thanks, FDJ2, for clarifying that point, and for the other info you supplied. When we were talking about news reports, rumors, and even the Hotline Message and E-mail, I think I was informed enough to participate in the conversation. Now you have 23 pages of details and an intimate working knowledge of your system, and I really don't think I'm eqipped to comment.

I will say this, though.


The right of termination by DALPA doesn't seem to be very valuable in the big picture. Remember, the reason Delta needs this thing is to delay bankruptcy, right? So, picture DALPA sitting on one side of the table aiming the "We're gonna cancel the Post Retirement Pilot program if you _______" gun at management, and Management still sits on the other side of the table aiming the "We're gonna hafta declare bankruptcy" gun back at DALPA.

You can brag about having that big gun, but do you really think DALPA would ever be in a position to pull that trigger?

Frankly, that big gun just doesn't impress me as being much more valuable than a paperweight.


Anyway... y'all have the TA - - read it carefully, and use your brains. Don't vote out of fear.