I get it. You don't. It matters ONLY if you think the basis for the pay disparity should reflect in the SLI. Since the formula reflects their productivity, the issue becomes neutral.
That's a negative. It's a discrepancy in compensation. That leads to increased compensation for Delta pilots. That leads to better career earnings expectations, which leads to increased seniority when the pay is equalized. It IS a valid argument. Of course, how much weight is given to the argument is anyone's guess, which can be said for all arguments.
It appears our side is making an issue of the numbers of jobs that were attached to aircraft that had bigger numbers in the mutually-accepted formula.
We will make that argument as well regarding the staffing formula, bringing about 400 jobs to the table for you which weren't there before.
YOU appear to believe that fluctuating rates are more important that the underlying
basis for the rates.
This is more of a contract negotiation thing than an SLI thing, IMO. You get your money, but you brought subservient pay rates to the table for the SLI. That DOES affect career earnings and expectations, and has been used in recent arbitration hearings as a basis for SLI. Of course, I can also just cut your argument both ways in that your -9 guys deserve to be at the bottom of the list for your reasons. Either way the thing goes, you lose numbers. Cant have it both ways.
1. So what? Your tenure at DAL doesn't give you the first-hand experience to put that in context. Remember when you went on strike to generate leverage? No? You didn't?
Nope, the leverage was generated via the severe need for 777 and 767-400s at Delta. We said that we were not interested in flying the 777 nor the -400 for what the company was willing to pay. Negotiations failed. The company decided to cancel the orders. We lost the slots. It
was effectively "going on strike". Boeing came back to the company after some immediate slots came available, the company snagged them, contacted the union to bring the issue back up, we got the rate, and the rest is history. It had
ZERO to do with the strike, although your strike was indeed bold and beautiful. You guys are the best, so brave and proud. Blather, blather, blather.
I was here, I do have the experience.
2. Was it done unilaterally or with preconditions WRT the SLI? If your answer to both of those questions is "no" [Hint: It is], it has no bearing on the matter at hand.
Excellent question. Answered above. Admissable as the day is long. Being used as we type. Will make a difference. Dealt with.
The rates won't...the numbers of pilots will. Ironically, that is the essence of your side's proposal.
We got you on numbers of pilots as well. We got you drastically on widebodies. Now that supertripendicular widebody thing is another matter.
The "reality" is that pay rates don't matter...either before, or after. What matters is where we are on the list, and how important the panel feels our expectations of movement are. One of those is measurable. One is not.
Ok, I disagree with you as stated, but we got you there as well.
Yawn
The descriptor is used to differentiate aircraft by size. Simple terms like "widebody" get blurry when a "narrowbody" B757-300 carries more than a "widebody" B767...or a "widebody" A330 is lumped as the equivalent of a smaller "widebody" such as the B767ER.
So differentiate them by size, not descriptors. You guys seem to harbor this thing that Delta pilots think that they are aviation gods. We aren't. Nor are "super-premium" widebody pilots. You simply are getting back what your side has been giving.
We reached a compromise on the pay rates for those aircraft within the JCBA, but we
KNOW size matters when we talk numbers of pilots...because we tie our
productivity to size. And productivity is the bedrock of our contract.
Like it or not, that contract dramatically increased the pay for NWA pilots. It ALSO stopped the bleeding in the pilot ranks. Parking -9s was happening. It still is. The manning formula is going to keep pilots on the property that the company does not need. Delta recently was going to hire, and we gave them relief. The facts speak. Your ranks were going down. Ours were going up. That's real pilots.
What springboard did you use for the 777/764 agreement?
Our own. Explained above.
It's called Pattern Bargaining. It means timing matters. It means the actions of other pilot groups matter. And really, it means that sometimes it don't matter who you are, what you are, or even how good you are. Sometimes all that matters is when you are.
That's right, and under ALPA merger policy, timing matters as well. In fact, the "timing" usually boils down to 1 day, a snapshot day. I give you credit for striking. Frankly, the Delta pilot group has not needed to strike, in our opinion, which is the one that matters. Dropping a nuke for the sake of dropping it is stupid, and we haven't felt that need. We set the Delta dot though the help of our own leverage. We told them to stuff it with their 777 and -400. They came back to us. Our leverage was a little caveat in our contract known as section 3.b.6--which allowed us to park an aircraft in 6 months if we had not established a pay rate. That killed the company--absolutely a dagger in the heart of that battle. They came back to us, we got the rate, they got rid of 3.b.6 in our contract. Victory for us and all airlines. MUCH more effective than you strike, if you ask me. We won, didn't cost the company as much money as you did, and dramatically increased pay and work rules for others to springboard. That was our "strike", and deserves every bit the battle star.
Let me add one more thing. We both know that our little battle here has no bearing on this arbitration. It is for monday morning lawyers, no more no less. I'll leave it here no matter the outcome. That's what Delta pilots do. Fight and then move on. Your track record does not reflect that. What say you?
