Not an excuse, but......

[Tanker Clown]

Gerbil...taking his spot as the chief Song apologist. This is a great TA if you are a CFII trying to get on with a regional and fly big (76 seat) jets.

The raise is nice....it only costs you your career later.

Penny wise and pound foolish.

That said, it will pass this group of fools by a huge margin.

 

[Jiminmem]

I have gone through a lot of what you are thinking too. What can it be? Why so early? What is up their sleeve? Maybe there are "strategic" reasons, maybe leases had to be signed, maybe loan applications to be verified, I don't know. Maybe AA in BK right now and USAir getting ready to give presentations to the creditor committee reasons? Plenty of rumors, one of which was the 717 transfer. Guess what? That one came true. There are a few more out there, rumors of course. If any of them do become true, huge hiring, lots of upgrades, and world domination. If none of the other ones do, then we just got some 717s, which will still involve hiring and upgrades, but there is still a lot of consolidation out there to go. Interesting times. I agree that this was done fast for some reason, but that reason may be a really good one. (and this TA did tighten up scope in the JV and code share area, which is a good thing) I know people will say "I've heard that one before." Look around what is happening right now in the industry. Crazy turmoil.


Bye Bye---General Lee

True, but those 717's will come no matter what. If Delta needs them, they'll get them. I'd rather work on our T/A and make sure we get it right, rather then rush and spend the next 3 years regretting it.

That's my take.

 

[General Lee]

I get it... You are willing to give up scope for a few bucks.. Thank you please drive through..

Do you mean give up MORE scope? The 76 seat deal was gone a long time ago, since BK. Again, I am looking at bringing down the TOTAL number of RJs, and adding mainline flying while decreasing DCI flying. Adding limits helps. And tying the two together (if you add RJs, you must add EXTRA mainline flying. Take away mainline, take away RJs), really helps. Plus, scope also consists of LARGE problems in Joint Ventures and Code Shares. Look at all of the INTL airlines wanting to be our friends? I want limits on those too, and the AK airlines West Coast experiment also needs tightening. This TA does that. There are LOTS OF THREATS OUT THERE for us, and we have to address each of them, not just one near us at home. Fix all of that, some work rules, some better sick time, and add a pay raise? That is tough to do all of that to the max in one 3 year (a fast one) contract. Tough for even the DPA to do. How did the APA do at AA? Nothing in 5 years, and then a BK.



Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[General Lee]

True, but those 717's will come no matter what. If Delta needs them, they'll get them. I'd rather work on our T/A and make sure we get it right, rather then rush and spend the next 3 years regretting it.

That's my take.

Reading the article, it looks like it was tied to the TA. Delta could have allowed SWA to keep those 717s and their leases until 2017, and that would have hurt SWA financially too. They didn't want those planes at all. So, DL could have said "If ALPA and the pilots take the deal, then we can have these 717s. IF they don't, then let SWA choke on them." You just don't know.

And what will happen if the DPA or ALPA goes back and tries to negotiate for 2 more years? How much then would we ask for? A 44% raise? If we take 19% now, and then come back in 3 years and ask for a 20% raise (after we become hugely profitable as the analysts say we will), and get it, then we actually will get a 40% wage increase. Trying to get one at once is suicide. The APA asked for a 50% raise and got nowhere in 5 years, and then went BK. I wanted a big raise too, but a smaller one combined with a shorter contract and real improvements in other areas that will help, combined with known growth (717s), is NOT BAD AT ALL.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[General Lee]

Gerbil...taking his spot as the chief Song apologist. This is a great TA if you are a CFII trying to get on with a regional and fly big (76 seat) jets.

The raise is nice....it only costs you your career later.

Penny wise and pound foolish.

That said, it will pass this group of fools by a huge margin.

TANKY, WHAT? Cost you your career later? Less RJs, tighter INTL and domestic scope (Alaska), and pay more than SWA including the DC fund? Really? Can you please explain your lame slam? Just explain it please.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[Turtle21]

Comair? Now down to 44 total aircraft and shrinking everyday? And we know how you and the Easties feel about SLI. You agreed to binding arbitration, and the arbitrator (Nicelau) looked at what each of you brought to the table, and ruled. That is the most fair way, an outsider looking over the whole deal and deciding.

As far as ALPA goes, they are dealing with it one step at a time, not trying to leap over 5 steps to get to the ultimate place. You just can't do that anymore. When huge companies merge, it becomes harder to take action because National interests get in the way. It becomes harder and harder to get self help, which sucks, but that is the way it is. Maybe the best way to deal with that is to take smaller steps, MORE OFTEN. 3 year contract and getting things done before ammendable dates can help with that. I think I personally deserve a 300% wage increase, but nobody will listen to me.....except my wife. She is so cute.



Bye Bye--General Lee

I'm touched that you responded but not surprised that you missed the point.

ALPA thought they had the leeway to make improvements to the profession despite being spineless to take any responsibility to form any stand on scope and seniority.

Choosing leeway on those two things, scope and seniority, they set the course to a degradation of the profession. It was only a matter of time for management to erode the profession by dividing groups against each other, all with ALPA's shifting selfserving policies.

The fact that you are blaming other pilot groups for Deltas difficulty in negotiating is empirical evidence. Those pilot groups are on the course ALPA set for them and you.

 

[Tanker Clown]

I see a bump of 76 seat jets. You claim that's offset by a loss of 50 seat jets. Jets you claim are going away regardless of this TA. So why allow any RJs at all? SWA pilots make more than Song guys (and SWA 737 pilots pay would still be more than a Delta 737 pilots pay after this TA), and they don't give any of their flying to RJs. How come you guys have to give flying away to make almost as much money as they do?

How does this cost you a career? Just look at yourself. When you let the RJ camel's nose under the tent what happened? Before long, you guys went from well paid a-holes, to a-holes making crap money with furloughs while insert any RJ outfit name here, took over flying once done by Delta mainline jets.

Not to mention that you guys started a race to the bottom that all pilots now try to dig out of. This TA only enforces that.

The RJs flying at Delta is alive and well. But you got a raise to cave on it. Too bad you guys are well known for taking pay cuts. I got a feeling that your next round of pay cuts won't be offset by a round of RJ cuts.

The correct answer on RJ flying is to allow the company to do zero. And that's not a fantasy. Ask SWA. And the answer on compensation is you want SWA +1% for 737 flying.

Hopefully you guys will have a few people with balls that tell your company this. Sadly, we all know that you will fold like a cheap suit....with GL leading the retreat.

 

[Rough67]

TANKY, WHAT? Cost you your career later? Less RJs, tighter INTL and domestic scope (Alaska), and pay more than SWA including the DC fund? Really? Can you please explain your lame slam? Just explain it please.


Bye Bye---General Lee

Just so we are clear on your position... During the next contract/vote 3 years down the road, you'll be ok with it when the company needs the full 90 seat capacity in those RJs ? Got it, thanks.

 

[Jiminmem]

Just so we are clear on your position... During the next contract/vote 3 years down the road, you'll be ok with it when the company needs the full 90 seat capacity in those RJs ? Got it, thanks.

Exactly, once on property the RJs only get bigger. When the 717 leases are up I can guarantee they'll be asking for scope relief.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Good info. Truly. NN IS OUT btw.

On paper, it looks like we are tightening scope, because they are showing a net decrease in DCI airframes. But those are 50 seaters that are going ANYWAY.

We are capping 50 seaters at 125 (Who cares)

70-76 seaters now can go up to 325, whereas before it was capped at 255 I believe.

70 more 70-76 seaters!!! Yes you will see fewer RJs, but that's not because of this TA, it's going to happen ANYWAY!!! THAT is because of economics. What we're doing now is letting them have more 70-76 seaters.

If we left scope ALONE, we would be better off under the old contract because, economics are going to get rid of the 50 seaters, and the 70-76 seaters will be capped at 255 not 325.