Delta TA passes 62-38. 94% voted

[magrs]

What are the new pay rates?

 

[pilotyip]

Dear Fellow Pilot,

This morning, at 1000 ET, the ratification window for the Contract 2012 Tentative Agreement closed.***** Contract 2012 has been ratified by the Delta pilots.***** Of 10,864 eligible Delta pilots, 10,170, or 94 percent cast their vote. Of those, 6,327, or 62 percent voted “In Favor” of the agreement.

*****

The agreement will become effective on Sunday, July 1, 2012.***** Once implemented, the PWA will continue in full force and effect through December 31, 2015.

*****

In the coming weeks and months, you will receive a variety of communications as various contractual items approach implementation.***** The first of these, Scheduling Alert 12-07 -- Scheduling and PBS - What is About to Change and When, will be sent to you later today and will provide you with a broad overview of scheduling/PBS-related items that will be implemented over the next 19 months with an emphasis on those items that will be implemented in July and August.***** In particular, all pilots will receive a 4% pay rate increase on July 1, and the Reserve Guarantee will increase to the Average Line Value less two hours (72 hour minimum; 80 hour maximum).

*****

The ratification of the agreement represents the culmination of several months of effort on the part of your elected representatives, the entire extended committee structure, ALPA staff professionals, and the Negotiating Committee.***** Thanks to all of you who took the time to participate in the process by providing input to your elected reps, attending road shows, and ultimately, casting your vote.

*****

Respectfully,

Tim O’Malley
Chairman
Delta Master Executive Council
Air Line Pilots Association, Int’l

and is anyone surprised?

 

[SWA Bubba]

Interesting that the nut cases you describe and others on here ( can you imagine someone actually saying they are going to resign over this TA?) are the DPA supporters.
I guess you have to be a little loony to think DPA could oust ALPA and create the necassary unity to somehow get a better contract than the current pilot group can. What do they think, a whole new group of pilots are going to step up and get a better contract? Haven't they heard of USAPA?

Obviously it's up to Delta pilots as to whether to replace ALPA with DPA, but there's a world of difference between Delta's position and the one that created USAPA, Dan. USAPA was created specifically to circumvent an arbitration, and to advance one part of the USAir pilot group at the expense of the other part of the same pilot group, whom they were charged with "fairly" representing.

If Delta pilots replace ALPA with an in-house union, it would just be a different negotiating group, representing the exact same entire pilot group, and trying to get an improved contract for the exact same entire pilot group. If they did change unions, you'd see every pilot at that company behind it, hoping it could get a better deal. It would still represent every Delta pilot equally--something that's obviously not true at USAir.

There's advantages and disadvantages with both having ALPA and having one's own union. I suppose an appropos advantage to consider DPA over ALPA in this particular case would have been less of an apparent conflict of interest. Since ALPA represents regionals as well as mainline carriers, one could argue that they might not have tried as hard to reduce outsourcing as much, since that might hurt other ALPA carriers. Obviously the local Delta ALPA guys are the negotiators, but ALPA National policies and guidelines are considered. Would DPA have achieved a better reduction in outsourcing? Who knows; maybe not, but it's a perception that has to be considered.

Regardless, it's done. They have a contract that's been voted in. If the pilots still end up switching to an in-house union, it'll be because the other advantages were deemed more important than having ALPA.

Bubba

 

[SplitBar]

What are the new pay rates?

These are the rates at the amendable date of our old PWA, Jan 1st, 2012.

The Cut n Paste didn't work. Give me some seats + longevity and I'll look some up for you.

 

[SWA Bubba]

.... Good thing SW is pay for training, so you were able to get in the door there....

"Pay for training"? Really? Is that the best you've got? Are you guys STILL trotting out this tired and incredibly ignorant playground insult? What's next--"your momma's ugly"?

"Pay for training" is when you have to pay your employer to get qualified to work there or advance. Lilke paying Gulfstream or Ameriflight for the privilege of sitting in their airplanes and accumulating hours. Getting a rating somewhere else, is not only not "pay for training," but is something every major airline in this country requires. Southwest doesn't get paid for an applicant's type rating anymore than it gets paid for anything else its minimums required. Just like Delta, USAir, Hawaiian, etc. With your convoluted reasoning, satisfying the minimums for ANY major airline should be considered "Pay for training":

-- If your airline requires an ATP in its minimums (not required to be an airline pilot, just to be a captain; FOs only require commercial), then you've "paid for training." This would catch a lot of airlines in its net.

-- If your airline requires a type rating in its minimums (SWA does; others don't), then you've "paid for training." This is the only thing you guys ever bring up.

-- If your airline requires a 4-year degree (SWA does not; others do), then you've "paid for training." In this case, you've paid through the friggin' nose "for training." I'm guessing a 4-year degree costs a hell of a lot more than a type rating.

-- If your airline requires more logged pilot, multi, or PIC time than others, than you've obviously "paid for training" more than other specific airlines' applicants have.

Etc., etc., for whatever minimums or requirements your particular airline has. Since the airlines aren't selling degrees, type ratings, ATP licenses, etc., they ARE NOT "pay for training." So, SWA has higher minimums than other airlines. So what? Every airline has minimum qualifications that you have to meet. And you have to check all those boxes on your own time, and on your own dime.

You know, I obviously don't agree wth everything Waveflyer says (and I think we all agree that he says a lot of things), but he's arguing about historical actions, scope and selling out, and the best retort you've got is, "well,... you pay for training." Geez. Good comeback, Potsie. That's pathetic.

Bubba

 

[Dan Roman]

Obviously it's up to Delta pilots as to whether to replace ALPA with DPA, but there's a world of difference between Delta's position and the one that created USAPA, Dan. USAPA was created specifically to circumvent an arbitration, and to advance one part of the USAir pilot group at the expense of the other part of the same pilot group, whom they were charged with "fairly" representing.

If Delta pilots replace ALPA with an in-house union, it would just be a different negotiating group, representing the exact same entire pilot group, and trying to get an improved contract for the exact same entire pilot group. If they did change unions, you'd see every pilot at that company behind it, hoping it could get a better deal. It would still represent every Delta pilot equally--something that's obviously not true at USAir.

There's advantages and disadvantages with both having ALPA and having one's own union. I suppose an appropos advantage to consider DPA over ALPA in this particular case would have been less of an apparent conflict of interest. Since ALPA represents regionals as well as mainline carriers, one could argue that they might not have tried as hard to reduce outsourcing as much, since that might hurt other ALPA carriers. Obviously the local Delta ALPA guys are the negotiators, but ALPA National policies and guidelines are considered. Would DPA have achieved a better reduction in outsourcing? Who knows; maybe not, but it's a perception that has to be considered.

Regardless, it's done. They have a contract that's been voted in. If the pilots still end up switching to an in-house union, it'll be because the other advantages were deemed more important than having ALPA.

Bubba

You bring up some good points, however I still say voting in DPA with anything other than a strong majority would simply fracture the pilot group and make them much less effective......................bear with me Bubba, I'm trying to work "warrior spirit" in here somehow

 

[humveedriver]

The -200 type is what most people buy because it is the cheapest and meets the requirement. Higher Power is a popular facility that gets you through the program quickly. When SWA had -200s (mostly -200s), getting a 737 type in a -200 made sense and I believe initial training was quite a bit shorter than it is now. SWA is going to be a NG and Max fleet. That rating is not very helpful. It is a waste of time and money as far as I am concerned. If SWA was hiring street Captains, it might make sense. But the type requirement lost any real meaning 20 years ago.

 

[canyonblue]

And that's all you got. You're a bitter little troll on the bottom of the SW seniority list who's now behind 1700 Air Tran pilots, who DIDN'T have to buy their jobs there. Sucks to be you!

Scoot 11

Join Date
08-12-2011

Frickin new guy, or another GL alter-ego.

I always love how the loudest aholes never list where THEY work, embarrassed? What is the name of that awesome airline that you are employed again?

 

[magrs]

How about F/O 767 Intl 7th year?

 

[GogglesPisano]

How about F/O 767 Intl 7th year?

As of today the YR7 757/767 FO rate is $124.69. As of 1/1/13, $134.66.