Delta/Alaska, alliance---then acquisition of Alaska?? Article

[Cobraair75drvr]

Fwiw,

Using the sn # I have from the equity page, I have moved up 180+ since the jan 1 list. How many retirements has dal had??? My guess is less than 10. Our guys have a pension and most are punching out.

 

[nwaredtail]

Fwiw,

Using the sn # I have from the equity page, I have moved up 180+ since the jan 1 list. How many retirements has dal had??? My guess is less than 10. Our guys have a pension and most are punching out.

The only thing that matters is what the DAL guys say, haven't you learned anything? The arbitrators will ignore all of the testimony from the experienced NWA team, look at the Nicalau award, and give them everything they asked for.

NWA retirements don't matter, parking DC-9's and 747's do matter, our orders don't matter but DAL's do, etc. I am just sorry we wasted so much dues money trying to get a fair award. At least I get to keep my 2250/month pension. That will be huge in 19 years.

 

[RedRum]

General,

Please realize that any sort of scedule change going forward is that of DELTA's doing.

There is a 747-400 in paint right now in Victorville, CA. These airplanes don't grow on threes. We don't have a spare to pick up the flying for which it was pulled.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE... just try to realize that any schedule changes going forward whether they are an increase or a decrease is a DELTA decision. I spoke with a Delta cpatian the other day and he stated, "We are just scared that NW is going to park DC9's." I politely replied, "You mean Delta may park some DC-9s?" After he threw me out of the flightdeck...just kidding. It was a cordial conversation, but we all need to agree to disagree on some things. Some Delta pilots refuse to understand that this ship is being steered by Delta now (be careful what you wish for) and all decisions about aircraft are that of the combined carrier.

Just my dos centavos

 

[General Lee]

Bye Bye--General Lee

Wrong again, the greedy NW pilots wanted a ratioed list because it would have given them seniority and all the widebody equipment. Roberts saw how unfair and unequitable this was and awarded DOH with fences. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm, this has a familiar ring to it.

Results

Like I said, if y'all were merging with JB, your tune would be completely different. You would be screaming for date of hire.

JB and DL are not even close in size, and JB was started in '98. Relative seniority would never happen. Also, as I stated before, any arbitrator would look at what they bring to the table, and place people into spots where their current largest plane would fit. JB has A320s as the biggest plane, which would fit in near our 738 or MD90. The number 1 JB guy hired in 98 would fit in close to a DL Captain on one of those two planes, which was hired around 1998. You and I know that is how it would be done.


And as far as the ratioed award your ex NWA negotiators wanted (so nice of them!), the lead negotiator, the one this current one admired, pointed out that the Roberts award should be looked at how NOT to do things. Did you not read that part? Selective reading is something you guys do well. I doubt Bloch will do that. Roberts saw how inequitable your proposal was (and still is today!), and saw that you guys were asking for everything (sounds familiar), and it looks like you guys haven't learned anything from history. If you can find some supporting testimony from the hearings for your views, I would love to see it.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[General Lee]

General,

Please realize that any sort of scedule change going forward is that of DELTA's doing.

There is a 747-400 in paint right now in Victorville, CA. These airplanes don't grow on threes. We don't have a spare to pick up the flying for which it was pulled.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE... just try to realize that any schedule changes going forward whether they are an increase or a decrease is a DELTA decision. I spoke with a Delta cpatian the other day and he stated, "We are just scared that NW is going to park DC9's." I politely replied, "You mean Delta may park some DC-9s?" After he threw me out of the flightdeck...just kidding. It was a cordial conversation, but we all need to agree to disagree on some things. Some Delta pilots refuse to understand that this ship is being steered by Delta now (be careful what you wish for) and all decisions about aircraft are that of the combined carrier.

Just my dos centavos

So, NWA never thought about parking any DC9s on their own? (Steenland stated there would be 41 larger DC9s left after the parkings of the DC9-30s) Now that that has changed, that would be DL's decision as you say. But, NWA had plans to cut a lot. They also parked 10 757s and gave them to Fedex, along with some A319s recently (parked, not sold to Fedex obviously). There is a plan for the 742s, and I am sure they are part of those "confidential" transcripts we can't read. I did see that one 742 was contracted by CRAF for 1 extra year, which is good, but I haven't seen anything yet on the cargo ops. I hope it sticks around, but that airplane for cargo is slowly losing it's luster. Only Connie and a select few still use it, and almost all are switching to the 744. If we do that too, it will still be a loss of positions.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Fly4hire]

General,

Please realize that any sort of scedule change going forward is that of DELTA's doing.

There is a 747-400 in paint right now in Victorville, CA. These airplanes don't grow on threes. We don't have a spare to pick up the flying for which it was pulled.

You realize of course this logic will be twisted against us. First we should be disadvantaged in SLI because these aircraft are all supposedly going to be parked. Then if they are not, it because DAL decided not to, therefore they saved our jobs, and they are now post merger acft and will be credited towards the DAL side, or so the story will go. BTW, have they issued the yellow Star of David's yet to wear on our DBJ's?

 

[General Lee]

You realize of course this logic will be twisted against us. First we should be disadvantaged in SLI because these aircraft are all supposedly going to be parked. Then if they are not, it because DAL decided not to, therefore they saved our jobs, and they are now post merger acft and will be credited towards the DAL side, or so the story will go. BTW, have they issued the yellow Star of David's yet to wear on our DBJ's?

C'mon now. We think the 744s are great, and you will get to fly them for whatever time is set, just like our guys flying our 777s (your greenbooks are licking their chops....). I think some of us are concerned with the DC9s and 742s, and if they are staying longer than planned, great. If they are not, then that is a problem, and to think that your management was NOT going to park any (wrong, Steenland stated as much prior to the DCC), then you are wrong. If you bring older planes to the table, don't think they will stay forever, and the 742Fs are on the way out at most modern cargo carriers, especially flying Asia. Senior people fly them, and that could concern a lot of people here. We are adding a lot of NEW planes (6-8 new 777s next year alone, along with 737-700s), and there are interesting things going on that may add even more. The reasons you claim you are being disadvantaged in the SLI (attrition---never been used before and we have more retirements in the long run compared to you guys, and relative seniority or ratios---something you guys have used or tried to use in all of your other merger talks) don't really hold water. Again, we'll have to see what happens, since a negotiated settlement doesn't look likely.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[nwaredtail]

Ok general, explain something simple to me then. If NWA stood alone, I was set to retire number 37 (.007%) at age 60 and in the top 500(10%) my last 7 years, pretty nice.

Under DAL's proposal, I initailly lose 8% seniority and the highest I would get is around 2200 (17%) at age 60.

Without answering a question with a question, or talking about NWA's proposal (even though most DAL pilots would be better off in 5 years), tell me how this is a good deal for me.

 

[ClearRight]

My crystal ball shows Skywest SEA, PDX and LAX RJ bases flying the lean mid-haul routes as "Delta Connection" feeding Alaska, Horizon's RJs gone, the Q400 flies the high-frequency and short-haul runs.

 

[General Lee]

Ok general, explain something simple to me then. If NWA stood alone, I was set to retire number 37 (.007%) at age 60 and in the top 500(10%) my last 7 years, pretty nice.

Under DAL's proposal, I initailly lose 8% seniority and the highest I would get is around 2200 (17%) at age 60.

Without answering a question with a question, or talking about NWA's proposal (even though most DAL pilots would be better off in 5 years), tell me how this is a good deal for me.

Tell that to the USAir East pilot who had 17 years at USAir and then ended up next to the bottom newhire at AWA. Mergers can screw with those numbers. If oil had stayed at high numbers, all the airlines could have dumped every unprofitable route, and we all could have been out of jobs. Things change. As far as mergers go, the fairest thing out there on two like sized companies is to make sure nobody gets a windfall, with QOL or pay. That sounds a lot like staying about where you are in the new company compared to where you were. If you were a reserve capatain, and then out of nowhere could hold a line on a larger plane, that is a windfall. Your 10 year fence stance was created for a reason, as Noserider stated in his retiremement chart and observations below it.

Now I looked at your future percentages, and do you plan on going out at 60 or 65? What will your percentage be at 65? I know NALPA said there would be a lot of people leaving now or after the DCC, but with the economy tanking and their other income (other than the pension), like their 401Ks, also tanking, many may stay longer. If I were you, I would plan for 65, and hopefully have enough to leave earlier. Also, you said you would lose 8% seniority with DALPA's proposal. How is that? If we placed your bottom 400 on the bottom of the combined list, then we on our side would only increase 2% from our current percentage (relative). That would mean you would be down 2% from your current percentage. If you are at the 75% now, you would be at the 77% with our proposal. I can't see your 8% loss.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[qxdash8]

Ok general, explain something simple to me then. If NWA stood alone, I was set to retire number 37 (.007%) at age 60 and in the top 500(10%) my last 7 years, pretty nice.

Under DAL's proposal, I initailly lose 8% seniority and the highest I would get is around 2200 (17%) at age 60.

Without answering a question with a question, or talking about NWA's proposal (even though most DAL pilots would be better off in 5 years), tell me how this is a good deal for me.

That isn't a good deal for you, but comparing the DL proposal to a stand alone NW is the whole apples to oranges thing. Where would you end up under the NW proposal? I'm not GL so maybe I can ask that question.

By the way - don't you mean age 65?

 

[nwaredtail]

That isn't a good deal for you, but comparing the DL proposal to a stand alone NW is the whole apples to oranges thing. Where would you end up under the NW proposal? I'm not GL so maybe I can ask that question.

By the way - don't you mean age 65?

I actually end up a little worse under NWA's proposal, but only by a couple of % points. What the General and many DAL pilots fail to acknowledge, is that 1000's of DAL pilots actually end up higher up on a DOH combined list than they would have had DAL stood alone. At least the arbitrators have seen this.

The relative seniority by category totally benefits DAL pilots and harms NWA pilots (by loss of attrition and seniority loss) while the NWA proposal only initially may harm a few, but is negated quickly. So an arbitrator will have to decide if it's good to give everything to one side or do what is best for BOTH. HMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

 

[General Lee]

I actually end up a little worse under NWA's proposal, but only by a couple of % points. What the General and many DAL pilots fail to acknowledge, is that 1000's of DAL pilots actually end up higher up on a DOH combined list than they would have had DAL stood alone. At least the arbitrators have seen this.

The relative seniority by category totally benefits DAL pilots and harms NWA pilots (by loss of attrition and seniority loss) while the NWA proposal only initially may harm a few, but is negated quickly. So an arbitrator will have to decide if it's good to give everything to one side or do what is best for BOTH. HMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

So, arbitrators have seen that DOH is better for some of our pilots? Which ones? Not our senior guys. Can you post what the arbitrators supposedly said, I would love to see that in the testimony. I don't recall anything like that.

And, we have MORE WIDEBODIES, that PAY MORE. Guess what? We are bringing more to the table. Of course we want more of the pie, we are bringing more into it. You are bringing a lot of low paying planes. Great. If we keep all of the DC9s you keep saying will happen, that will mean more of the lowest paying plane on our combined pay rate list. We are bringing more new widebodies, and more orders. Your 787 orders may never come to fruition. Our vast quantity of 757s that you make fun of because they pay more than your's used to is just a small part of our larger fleet, and higher paying fleet. Ask your current 757 pilots if they minded getting our current 767 pay rate? It was a large raise for them. They are welcome... We are bringing more metal and more pay, while you are bringing older planes that may leave sooner, and a large amount of narrowbodies that pay less. It is all about who brings what to the table. You bring attrition now, while we bring a lot more later on. That issue is a dead issue.

And, an arbitrator will not split down the middle just so both of us are happy. I think that is what you guys are hoping for. If DOH is a 1 and staple is a 10 on a 1-10 scale, we started with a 5.5 and you started with a 1. We won't go down the middle to appease you, and I doubt the arbitrator panel will either.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[regionaltard]

Tell that to the USAir East pilot who had 17 years at USAir and then ended up next to the bottom newhire at AWA.

You mean the guy who was near the bottom of the old list who found himself near the bottom of the new list? What's your point? The merger didn't change his career expectations at all.

 

[General Lee]

You mean the guy who was near the bottom of the old list who found himself near the bottom of the new list? What's your point? The merger didn't change his career expectations at all.

That's right, and that is what is fair. If you are at the bottom of a list, you should still be at the bottom of a combined list. That is relative seniority. We are also bringing more widebodies and higher pay for those widebodies to the table. That is why we would have ratios. It is all about what planes and payscales you bring.

Also, let's look at the whole picture here. Northwest lost a lot of work rules and pay in their BK, but kept their pensions. We lost our pensions, but kept the pay fairly high, and kept most of our rules. Now, after the DCC, NWA has our higher pay (just got a nice raise), and our work rules (like manning rules--2 Captains and 2 FOs for ultra long haul), and we don't get our pensions back. The NWA guys wanting and thinking they deserve more is a joke, but not unexpected.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[nwaredtail]

We are also bringing more widebodies and higher pay for those widebodies to the table. That is why we would have ratios. It is all about what planes and payscales you bring.

Says who, you? You don't get a say last time I looked. How about NWA consistantly made more money than you and had more cash vs. realtive size than you. How about we count that. We also had more airplanes that were paid for, how about that? How about credit for dealing with old flight attendants? Seems ridiculus, right? Let's bet beers on what he says about planes/pay in his award. My bet, not much.

We lost our pensions, but kept the pay fairly high, and kept most of our rules.

That was the choice you made, without any knowledge of a merger. It has nothing to do with a SLI. What did your god, Nicalau, say about USAir's pension, pay rates, rules. Yup, NOTHING.

Now, after the DCC, NWA has our higher pay (just got a nice raise),

Thanks to the NWA Negotiating team. This also has nothing to do with DAL pilots. DELTA MANAGEMENT gave us the raise, NOT YOU!

and our work rules (like manning rules--2 Captains and 2 FOs for ultra long haul),

Same answer

and we don't get our pensions back.

So you want the NWA pilots to take it up the %$#^ because we froze our pensions, which again has nothing to do with you. OK, following that logic, the DAL pilots received more claim money than we did in the BK contract, should NWA pilots get a credit for that. Seems stupid, huh?


If these are really your arguments, I am really starting to feel better about the DOH list.

 

[atpcliff]

Hi!

What are the retirements for 2012?

Anyone heard about any NWA hiring?

cliff
YIP

 

[General Lee]

Says who, you? You don't get a say last time I looked. How about NWA consistantly made more money than you and had more cash vs. realtive size than you. How about we count that. We also had more airplanes that were paid for, how about that? How about credit for dealing with old flight attendants? Seems ridiculus, right? Let's bet beers on what he says about planes/pay in his award. My bet, not much.

We all know Steenland horded cash to attract a merger partner. He did NOT expand your operations, like we did. While we expanded (17 757ERs from AA etc), you were planning on parking DC9s (Steenland stated that). Yes, your DC9s were paid for, but Steenland stated all but 41 larger ones were going away, and you sold some 757s to FedEx and parked a few A319s.

That was the choice you made, without any knowledge of a merger. It has nothing to do with a SLI. What did your god, Nicalau, say about USAir's pension, pay rates, rules. Yup, NOTHING.

Choice? We had no choice. Do you think we would have had 2000 Captains bailing out if we had a choice? You did have a choice, and eventually got back better pay, and rules, THANKS TO US. What did we get back? We also just used a lot of the money DL offered us to bring you up to parity. It had to be done, but now you want MORE. Ridiculous.



Thanks to the NWA Negotiating team. This also has nothing to do with DAL pilots. DELTA MANAGEMENT gave us the raise, NOT YOU!

Nope. They asked us what we wanted to do with the money. They needed our acceptance for the merger, it was in our contract. We could turn down any code sharing, and before the SOC you would have been a code share initially. Our side stated we needed parity, and no B-scales. Sorry, you are wrong.



Same answer



So you want the NWA pilots to take it up the %$#^ because we froze our pensions, which again has nothing to do with you. OK, following that logic, the DAL pilots received more claim money than we did in the BK contract, should NWA pilots get a credit for that. Seems stupid, huh?

You can't have everything. Sorry. And, the USAir precedent is significant.


If these are really your arguments, I am really starting to feel better about the DOH list.

Don't get used to that feeling.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Flying the Line]

From a non-seriority integration perspecive, a DL,NW, AS would be able to dominate traffic within the Us and abroad. It would be more adviseable for other airlines to protest this than DL, NW or AS.

 

[Full of LUV]

Of course because the DAL folks are assumed to work to 65

Ok general, explain something simple to me then. If NWA stood alone, I was set to retire number 37 (.007%) at age 60 and in the top 500(10%) my last 7 years, pretty nice.

Under DAL's proposal, I initailly lose 8% seniority and the highest I would get is around 2200 (17%) at age 60.

Without answering a question with a question, or talking about NWA's proposal (even though most DAL pilots would be better off in 5 years), tell me how this is a good deal for me.

Because you havn't realized that age 60 retirement has been shot dead by the profession. If you stay to 65 you probably will have similar seniority status those last 5 years, but if everyone at DAL is assumed to go to 65 and you only stay to 60 that is the real cost of "retiring early" that happens.