New Pilot TA breakdown

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

I completely grasp the concept behind work to rule.

It is based on the idea that employees and the company are doing less than that on an ongoing basis and that shouldn't be the case.

Both sides need to do their job per the agreement all the time. There is no industrial action that is justified by doing anything differently.

Are you sure you understand the concept?
Looking at just the text you wrote above, I'm not sure you (still) do.

 

I didn't raise the idea of work to rule to this topic and it doesn't belong here.

NHBB raised the idea (for a work action to start 1/1/16).
And it certainly does belong belong here.
Past history suggests that it may be unlikely to happen, but nevertheless it is a possible consequence of the 'no' vote by the pilots.

 

[FWAAA]

southwind,  just my own opin..  PS can be a good thing  and it can be a bad thing    good  as long as the company posts profits    WN  is a prime example
 
bad    when the companies lose money   like the stretch of yrs that occurred at the majors  prior to the merger 
 
But  me  I would rather have a increase in wages over PS any day bec it does not take a whole lot for a company to post a loss due to variety of reasons  whereas in a contract and despite money losses  Id still have the higher take home wages vs no PS

I agree that profit sharing isn't something you should rely on and yes, it can vary depending on the company's fortunes. That said, I continue to believe that it's stupid beyond belief to trade it away for percentage pay raises. In year one, that's not called a pay raise - that's called a "concession." That pay raise was bought by giving up something that could turn out to be very valuable in the future.

Competent unions (IMO) should spend some more time educating their members that they intend to negotiate pay raises WITHOUT giving up what could be a very lucrative bonus arrangement. Competent unions should be able to get both: pay raises and preserve the profit sharing.

The common response to that is this: but if the company enters a losing streak and produces no profits, it's better to have the guaranteed pay raises instead." That refrain always leaves out the obvious: If the employer loses money several years in a row, the next step is Ch 11 bankruptcy, where the employer demands (and always gets) huge wage and benefit concessions. If your employer is making billions of dollars in profits, then you want to share in those capitalistic excesses. And if your employer isn't making billions of dollars in profits, then you are probably not going to get to keep your measly raises that you got for trading away your profit sharing.

Typically, unions resist giving up gains that they achieved in prior contracts, as it's very difficult to get them back. Work rules are one example. So is profit sharing. For a short time, AA's employees had (before the APA pilots foolishly traded it away) 15% first dollar profit sharing. And unbelievably, there were APA pilots bitching about profit sharing in December when they were voting on their new contract - as in "where is our profit sharing now that AA is making billions?" You gave it away, fools.

Pay raises are a great idea, but not when you have to buy them by giving up other parts of your contract. Unions typically don't like cost-neutral contracts, but when you trade away profit sharing for fixed raises, management calls that a "victory" and pops the champagne corks. I realize you work for US, and you've had half a lifetime of being beaten down and having your expectations lowered and working under bankruptcy concession contracts, but your employer now makes more money each year than USAir earned in all of its years of existence. If DL's employees are getting an extra 8 weeks of pay because of its huge profits, AA's employees should be getting the same.

 

[700UW]

Not true at all, can you go to the bank and use PS as guaranteed income for a loan?
 
Ask DL FAs about their medical costs, and no protection vs AA or UA.
 
And if all the airlines paid the same to their employees that would be collusion.

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

Not true at all, can you go to the bank and use PS as guaranteed income for a loan?

 
I don't think this is a good argument.  It depends on how much of a loan you are asking for.
If you're making $50k per year you are not going to be approved for a $500k loan, profit sharing or not.

 

[WorldTraveler]

There is no threat or even suggestion of work actions at DL

The topic doesn't have any merit

DL offered a TA which it and DALPA said would make DL pilots the highest paid in the US but it came with costs. All jobs do. That is why it is called work

DL and DALPA have to regroup and decide if both can offer the other something without offsetting the gain

 

[700UW]

Hint...
 
Banks dont let you use profit sharing as income.

 

[robbedagain]

thank you for the response     
 
Meto  are you surprised by the largely no vote   and whats your take on the fact it was shot down by a large margin

 

[700UW]

MEC Letter:
 
https://dal.alpa.org/DesktopModules/Bring2mind/DMX/Download.aspx?Command=Core_Download&EntryId=8161&language=en-US&PortalId=0&TabId=2593

 

[WorldTraveler]

I can assure you that alot of employees are interested in maximizing their income more than worrying about how they can maximize their indebtedness.

 

[FWAAA]

Here's a thread from Flyertalk where some frequent fliers and some employees are discussing the pilots' rejection of the TA:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/delta-air-lines-skymiles/1694022-dl-pilots-vote-down-contract.html

One individual dimwit in that thread has posted 30 times - more than 25% of the total posts, despite their complete lack of knowledge about the topic.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

Here's a thread from Flyertalk where some frequent fliers and some employees are discussing the pilots' rejection of the TA:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/delta-air-lines-skymiles/1694022-dl-pilots-vote-down-contract.html

One individual dimwit in that thread has posted 30 times - more than 25% of the total posts, despite their complete lack of knowledge about the topic.

 
Interesting read 
 
From some of the pilot comments, it seems their contract has some bearing on the non-pilot employees profit sharing

 

[metopower]

thank you for the response     
 
Meto  are you surprised by the largely no vote   and whats your take on the fact it was shot down by a large margin

Thanks for asking the only one that has first hand knowledge( on this board). Had nothing to do with money or profit sharing but with perception and timing. Miscalculation by company and union leadership. Sick leave was the driver in this whole thing. Punish those that abuse.(former NW) and leave the program as it is for those that don't abuse it. Profit sharing should have been left alone. Perception was if you moved that number so far what does that mean? Are you expecting to make $5 billion next year ? Perception was that it was too far out there . Should have been moved to 3 or 4...perception would have been different. Restore pay to pre 911 rates. Retirement for former DL pilot equal to NW pilots . Just some of the reasons. Thanks for asking and not speculating.

 

[robbedagain]

np meto   I always like to hear perception from the group involved  and in this case  you bec your an active DL pilot.    

 

[WorldTraveler]

meto
thanks for your perspective and forgive me if you think I am taking away your voice.

however, what you say is EXACTLY what many DL pilots said on social media, which has played a more powerful role in this contract than ever before. There was little doubt early in the process that displeasure was very high among the TA.

Kev and I also noted that the problem was the combination of a number of issues that affected nearly every pilot.

I also am not sure that it is worth trying to "Fix" profit sharing right now and you are absolutely right that DL people are going to perceive any attempts to fix PS as an effort to take part of it away. and what happens with PS for pilots will affect other DL workgroups.

The irony of course is that the IAM and others have tried for years to marginalize PS as not being something of value - or they try to argue that it can disappear in a flash and yet DL clearly expects to generate profits on par or larger to what they are reporting now for years to come... and Wall Street agrees.

PS is a very valuable part of DL employee compensation and it has worked powerfully for DL to be at the top of the industry.

As to the sick time issue, I am sure DL would love to go after the few abusers but unions don't work that way. If DALPA would give DL the ability to address the minority of abusers, the rest of the pilot population would have no impact.

not sure how much longer you want to fly, but for a lot of senior aviators, a big increase could help you put a lot more in retirement and that is why I would like to see a quick settlement. I also know that Richard Anderson wants some of the productivity issues esp. with line check and sick time resolved or at least on a solid path to improvement.

again, thanks for your perspective and know that I am not trying to take away your voice but just that social media makes it clear where the issues are for each demographic of the pilot workforce.

 

[Kev3188]

Punish those that abuse.(former NW) and leave the program as it is for those that don't abuse it.

Wedge aside, I've noticed that that is how DL operates, regardless of issue. Everyone pays for the "sins of others."

Has it always been like this?