Delta (finally) adds -8 to the CF34 line

[737823]

Why should a union be forced to represent someone and they not pay for the cost of the representation?

That is why there are dues objectors.

When I was a member of the UAW and the BCTGM, the union was forced by law to represent employees who werent members, is that fair?

Well maybe you shouldn't have paid for something you could have for free. My neighborhood has a trash newspaper published every week filled with ads for restaurants and realtors and they expect "voluntary subscribers" yet it's still into box every week and it goes straight to the recycling bin.

The same reason certain ethnic and racial groups are the beneficiary of affirmative action policies.

Same reason the progressive tax rate structure exists.

The world is a very unfair place, get over it and move on. Unions still exist in RTW. The IAM has many members in KS and TX, both RTW states. They still fly around on the Lear and enjoy their junkets so what's the big deal? Besides isn't the MAPP meant to incentive IAM membership with Groupon like discounts? That's what the founder of the program said in the video:

http://www.goiam.org/index.php/news/latest-videos/11012-mapp-a-new-course-in-kansas

Josh

 

[southwind]

Why should a union be forced to represent someone and they not pay for the cost of the representation?

That is why there are dues objectors.

When I was a member of the UAW and the BCTGM, the union was forced by law to represent employees who werent members, is that fair?

Why should I be foreced to join a union, in order to be employed by certain company's ?

 

[737823]

Why should I be foreced to join a union, in order to be employed by certain company's ?

I'm sure 700 will say you are told that's a condition of employment but yes it is wrong.

Josh

 

[700UW]

You dont have to be a member, you have to pay a fee thats germane to enforcing and negotiating the contract.

If a person enjoys the wages, benefits and working conditions from the CBA, they should pay whats germane, that is only fair.

Maybe I should just tell the bank I dont want to pay my mortgage, hey everyone else pays so I wont pay but I will enjoy living in my house.

Get off the Lear Jet, they dont fly all over the place on it, stop lying like you always do.

How many jets does BOA have?

A whole fleet, but yet their customers are forced to pay for it, they have a hangar in CLT that has several planes, and they are used way more than the IAM lear, the use of the lear is on the LM2.

Should GE's customers and shareholders pay for Jack Welch's unlimited use of GE's fleet of planes and he has been retired for like over 10 years.

Maybe I should tell Duke Energy to lower my bill cause I dont want to pay for their jets either.

Its only a condition of employment if its a closed shop and the person is told that when they apply and interview for the job. And if a company agrees to it, then so be it, dont work for them.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Kev, at what point does DL provide base rate increase and/or changes to work rules to keep the IAM off the property? If history is any guide don't they usually wait until just after the union files their cards for the election?

Josh

Good question. There's no definitive date, since it's a matter of getting cards signed...

It's usually a pre-emptive strike, so we'll see what happens this go 'round...

on the latest investor conference call, Bastian said that the pay raises will probably slow down since DL employees are now sufficiently above average (and not mentioned is that wage growth at WN is slowing).

While DL has used pay raises as a counter to organization efforts, DL employees have probably not been as highly paid relative to the industry average at any time since deregulation as they are now.

Further, DL compensation includes profit sharing and no airline is expecting profits anywhere close to the $1.5 - $2 billion in profits that DL is forecasting. Even at the reduced profit sharing percentages, DL employees will likely earn profit sharing well above any other group of airline employees.

Further, let's not forget that some unions at some airlines agreed to eliminate profit sharing for their represented employees.

 

[robbedagain]

you can bet your money there wt that dl will not give the raises to their employees.... thats an easy call all their mgmt has to say no raises bec theyre above average.... with a top out at 22 or 23 an hr which is 2 to 3 bucks more than us i would not consider that an above avg..
while my dad may be retired long ago from dl he and i have sparred on union representations bec im a strong believer in having a union for protection against corporat mgmt while i admit that unions have their corks mgmt has theirs too as for dl using that to pay their employees not to organize.... piedmont (the commuter for us exp) did the same sh!t and they still went union with the CWA but the mgmt there made sure the 1st couple attempts were doomed to fail.. i was there when that happen... they gave employees a raise then when the cwa failed the first time... the airline took back the raises then all kinds of crap about what the airline did came up and all well the cwa won and now represent EN folks.. so this shannigans that DL is pulling is no surprise to me.

as for the profit sharing.... thats once a yr they pay their employees based on the yr prior as it is at us and at us while all groups except the iam have profit sharing we do have the iam pension fund does dl have any kind of retirement plans for their employees

 

[737823]

Get off the Lear Jet, they dont fly all over the place on it, stop lying like you always do.

"To meet our mission, to meet our goal would be virtually impossible commercially" -R. Thomas Buffenbarger

http://www.ustream.t...corded/25300440

See beginning at 0145, Buffy talking about use of corporate aircraft and nice shots of the interior

Josh

 

[WorldTraveler]

you can bet your money there wt that dl will not give the raises to their employees.... thats an easy call all their mgmt has to say no raises bec theyre above average.... with a top out at 22 or 23 an hr which is 2 to 3 bucks more than us i would not consider that an above avg..
while my dad may be retired long ago from dl he and i have sparred on union representations bec im a strong believer in having a union for protection against corporat mgmt while i admit that unions have their corks mgmt has theirs too as for dl using that to pay their employees not to organize.... piedmont (the commuter for us exp) did the same sh!t and they still went union with the CWA but the mgmt there made sure the 1st couple attempts were doomed to fail.. i was there when that happen... they gave employees a raise then when the cwa failed the first time... the airline took back the raises then all kinds of crap about what the airline did came up and all well the cwa won and now represent EN folks.. so this shannigans that DL is pulling is no surprise to me.

as for the profit sharing.... thats once a yr they pay their employees based on the yr prior as it is at us and at us while all groups except the iam have profit sharing we do have the iam pension fund does dl have any kind of retirement plans for their employees

Funny, Bob says that AA pays its employees based on what it thinks they are worth - true statement.... but if DL gives its employees pay raises and they end up as having above average pay, it is viewed solely on the basis of whether DL is trying to keep the unions out.

Suppose that DL's PRIMARY objective is to pay its employees at above average wages because that tells them what they are worth and thus motivates them to do well?

Again, we have heard for years that WN employees are paid well and do a great job for the company because they are unionized but if DL does the same thing, the motivation is viewed differently?

I don't think so.

DL is a very successful company that knows you can't pay your employees bottom of the barrel wages and expect them to deliver for the company.

It does happen that DL has trotted out pay raises right about the time some of the unionization efforts come around but a 10% or more pay difference over your network carrier peers is a fairly significant premium.

And profit sharing may only be paid once per year but it has amounted to about the equivalent of 3 weeks pay... nothing to sneeze at. Just because it is paid once per year makes it the responsibility of the employee to manage it well; despite what many argue, profit sharing is WITHHELD by the company at high tax rates but that doesn't mean that an employee will end up paying tax rates anywhere close to that high at the end of the year (or by April 15 of the following year).

As much as a 10% profit sharing combined with even 5% profit sharing is a very significant premium over the pay DL employees receive compared to their peers. Further, when the company has paid out large amounts of profit sharing for the past 3 years and expects to continue to do so - and Wall Street believes them - then profit sharing really does become part of your normal pay expectations.

You might think 10-15% in annual pay isn't enough of a difference to matter but I can assure you there are a whole lot of people in the world - and at other airlines in the industry who would gladly take a 10% or more pay raise.

I have consistently said that I support the right of employees to seek union representation and if they can get a better deal, then they should pursue it. I also support those who believe they can help achieve something better than what they have now. Nothing ventured is nothing gained.

My son asks for things all the time; sometimes I say yes and sometimes I don't. He wouldn't get anything beyond what I choose for him if he didn't ask.

But the history is very clear that when looking at an airline as a whole (or all of their represented/non-represented employees), and not an isolated look at one labor group, DL employees not only fared better during the BK years and have recovered more faster than their peers at other airlines who have been represented by labor unions.

For decades, DL employees have believed they are better off by having a cooperative, direct relationship and there are no solid indications that is anywhere close to changing outside of the pilot group - which itself has one of the most cooperative relationships with mgmt. in the US airline industry.

 

[robbedagain]

ill grant you that DL has been a success model... but if you had to compare them to WN id think that be a mighty hard comparison wouldnt you? WN being a heavily unionized company and theyre paid i think its far better in terms of wages vs DL employees and they still have a say in it but in the event of say closing a particular function DL can go ahead and give them say a 2 weeks notice if you will vs WN who has to go thru the channels with their union and all...

 

[Kev3188]

DL is a very successful company that knows you can't pay your employees bottom of the barrel wages and expect them to deliver for the company.

Actually, that's *exactly* what they expect from a significant number of frontline emloyees.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Kev,
how could there be an expectation that the employees should settle for bottom of the barrel wages when DL employees have rec'd industry average or better for years?

robbed,
I have no problem comparing DL with WN because if you do you would see that WN's model has been built on a much lower percentage of topped out and older employees and WN has had a very small percentage of employees at retirement age.

More significantly, WN doesn't have the retirement obligations that all of the network carriers had. UA and US terminated their pension plans in BK but CO, DL, NW, and now AA have all retained those obligations even if the plans were frozen. If WN had to spend an extra several hundred million dollars each year on pension benefits like the legacy carriers do - even if adjusted for WN's smaller size - the profit picture starts looking very different.

And health care costs most definitely are higher for senior and older workers.

And the argument can be made all day long that DL could terminate its employees on short notice but they haven't and they won't. DL is running a business and there is no more of an incentive to terminate their employees than there was for NW when AMFA went on strike - and AMFA lost that showdown w/ mgmt. Again, even w/ the AMFA situation, DL laid off a smaller percent of employees during the 2000s than did NW, UA, or US, DL's unionized peers in BK.

The notion that DL will pay its employees less or lay them off more often is just not born out by historic reality and there is equally no evidence to show that unions have been any more effective at saving jobs, retaining pay, or restoring it post BK any better than what DL has done.

Theory is great but proven evidence is far more indicative of what will really happen.

 

[Kev3188]

Kev,
how could there be an expectation that the employees should settle for bottom of the barrel wages when DL employees have rec'd industry average or better for years?

Maybe you should ask one of the thousands of Ready Reserve employees...

And the argument can be made all day long that DL could terminate its employees on short notice but they haven't and they won't.

Prediction: we see a "7.5 lite" sweep through the legacy NW stations in the next 2-3 years...

Theory is great but proven evidence is far more indicative of what will really happen.

The theories DL espouses often run very counter to the ones in use...

 

[WorldTraveler]

I believe you have said here that it is cheaper for DL to use an RR employee than to subcontract out the job yet AA and UA both just recently succeeded at eliminating their own people at dozens - scores - of cities in multiple capacities - ramp, cargo, and others while AA has just done the same thing in maintenance. The result will likely be that DL maintenance might be larger than any other airline after AA's BK layoffs are complete (and the tallies are publicly released) and DL ramp might have more employees outside of the biggest hubs than any of their competitors.

Other than fear, I'm not sure why you would believe that DL would need to lay off its own employees in small and medium stations as long as they have the ability to use RRs. It is precisely because other competitors don't have that capacity because of union contracts that their own employees are not cost-effective in small/medium sized cities.

And then there are hubs like SLC which have very uneven flight schedules and where there high percentages of RRs.
Also, as I have noted, the use of benefits as well as tax implications varies greatly by city which could effect how different stations are staffed.

As I have noted before, DL might well move to a model with a much smaller percentage of mainline FT employees in small/medium cities than other airlines including DL have used in those stations in the past, but I don't see the economics fundamentally resulting in an elimination of DL employees in many stations that now have them.

Further, as you know, the addition of the 717s will increase productivity since a 717 (approx. a DC9-30) can be worked more efficiently than if you boarded the same number of passengers on multiple RJ flights.

Factor in that the 717 will help shift revenue TO DL and from other carriers in many small and medium cities and those planes should be very welcome.
It's the DC9 that NW used as the backbone of its small and medium city network for years but with newer technology which means less fuel and less noise for the neighborhoods near the airport.
And best is that rampers and agents will be working w/ DL pilots and FAs on those planes.

Notably, UA's answer to DL's 717s is to order the E175 which will still be flown by outsourced crews and will still be smaller than the 717.

I find it hard to believe that the 717s will bring bad things to DL employees but instead might be a key distinguishing factor between DL and other network carriers.

 

[robbedagain]

What type of engines powers the 717 if i remember the MD-90 has the italian made engines i think is it the same as the 717

 

[WorldTraveler]

the M90 uses the IAE V2500 engine - joint venture of P&W plus a Japanese and European (German) company which is also available on the A320.

http://www.i-a-e.com/company/


The 717 is powered by Rolls-Royce engines.

http://www.rolls-royce.com/civil/products/smallaircraft/br715/index.jsp

Rolls-Royce used to be a shareholder/participant in the IAE group.