DOT FA cost/pay-compensation chart

I do not think that it will put it to rest for two reasons. First, this chart is about costs. Costs concern the company. Earnings concern me. I do not deposit the company's costs in my paycheck twice monthly. I deposit my earnings.

Second, these are 2007 figures. On the DL side, we have had two raises and other assorted pay items that bring up our earnings.

For those of you interested, the DL Management comparison can be found at DL/NWA wage/benefit comparison on deltafa.org
 
I do not think that it will put it to rest for two reasons. First, this chart is about costs. Costs concern the company. Earnings concern me. I do not deposit the company's costs in my paycheck twice monthly. I deposit my earnings.

Second, these are 2007 figures. On the DL side, we have had two raises and other assorted pay items that bring up our earnings.

For those of you interested, the DL Management comparison can be found at DL/NWA wage/benefit comparison on deltafa.org


Allow me to help you understand what "cost" is.

Cost.."Costs concern the company. Earnings concern me. I do not deposit the company's costs in my paycheck twice monthly"

Cost WILL concern you if DL doess't make enough to deposit what you COST them twice weekly. COST is what DL pays you in "earnings". COST is what DL pays for benefits you earn every two weeks. Therefore, COST is what is used for comparison between companies. Delta's cost Chart (the cooked one you linked to) comparison is artificial because they want you to believe that you are artificially making something you are not.

Furthermore, IF...the costs that DL provided the DOT (I think I trust a FEDERAL agency whom an airline company would not hardly provided cooked info to) otherwise I think DL may have an issue in store for them. It is one thing for DL to provide CORRECT information to the DOT, and quite another to provide cooked ones to FAs during an critical period that will affect costs.

Moreover, it is rather frightening that someone can't comprehend the relationship between "costs" to a company and their pay, vs. the ability to grasp the technicalities of emergency procedures.

You can "care" about reading the truth any way you like (current costs per airline)...it will have ZERO impact on the true COST of "what you take home, and what I take home on mirrored trips per month. (unless DL decides to take your trips away and give them to someone junior, I believe they don't need your permission to do that, right?)

I direct you to the bottom of the DOT chart (in PLAIN English)...you are able to READ the basic definition from which the "costs" were made from..right?

It appears you believe DL's CEO is misleading Wall Street when he states that DL has the LOWEST "costs" (that what you take home for bi weekly compensation) of all other major competitors. I happen to think that Mr. Anderson is telling the truth. He is a bright man, and I think he knows what DL's FAs costs are. (I can show you lots of articles of his statements about DL's low FA costs...if that will help in grasping this.

If you do not "deposit the company's costs bi weekly, just what do you deposit?"
 
I do not think that it will put it to rest for two reasons. First, this chart is about costs. Costs concern the company. Earnings concern me. I do not deposit the company's costs in my paycheck twice monthly. I deposit my earnings.

Second, these are 2007 figures. On the DL side, we have had two raises and other assorted pay items that bring up our earnings.

For those of you interested, the DL Management comparison can be found at DL/NWA wage/benefit comparison on deltafa.org

"It is not intended to be a complete summary of all pay and benefit rules and should be used for reference only."

Read the disclaimer at the top, aislehopper! C'mon aislehopper! You believe this pdf? Even Joanne Smith stated that you have the lowest cost.....and you'd believe her, right? Ya think they may intentionally have left something off to make it seem more palatable? Even if this pdf is all encompassing (and it's not), don't you think that this information will all change to the detriment of the flight attendant once the union is voted down?

Tell ya what aislehopper. Let's make a pact. If the union is voted down and this itemization of benefits you've provided doesn't change within 1 yr after the election, I will print the pdf out, eat it (without salad dressing), and never post on this website again . Conversely, if it does, you'll do the same. Deal?
 
Allow me to help you understand what "cost" is.

Cost.."Costs concern the company. Earnings concern me. I do not deposit the company's costs in my paycheck twice monthly"

Cost WILL concern you if DL doess't make enough to deposit what you COST them twice weekly. COST is what DL pays you in "earnings". COST is what DL pays for benefits you earn every two weeks. Therefore, COST is what is used for comparison between companies. Delta's cost Chart (the cooked one you linked to) comparison is artificial because they want you to believe that you are artificially making something you are not.

Furthermore, IF...the costs that DL provided the DOT (I think I trust a FEDERAL agency whom an airline company would not hardly provided cooked info to) otherwise I think DL may have an issue in store for them. It is one thing for DL to provide CORRECT information to the DOT, and quite another to provide cooked ones to FAs during an critical period that will affect costs.

Moreover, it is rather frightening that someone can't comprehend the relationship between "costs" to a company and their pay, vs. the ability to grasp the technicalities of emergency procedures.

You can "care" about reading the truth any way you like (current costs per airline)...it will have ZERO impact on the true COST of "what you take home, and what I take home on mirrored trips per month. (unless DL decides to take your trips away and give them to someone junior, I believe they don't need your permission to do that, right?)

I direct you to the bottom of the DOT chart (in PLAIN English)...you are able to READ the basic definition from which the "costs" were made from..right?

It appears you believe DL's CEO is misleading Wall Street when he states that DL has the LOWEST "costs" (that what you take home for bi weekly compensation) of all other major competitors. I happen to think that Mr. Anderson is telling the truth. He is a bright man, and I think he knows what DL's FAs costs are. (I can show you lots of articles of his statements about DL's low FA costs...if that will help in grasping this.

If you do not "deposit the company's costs bi weekly, just what do you deposit?"

Kev,

As a ramp guy, looking at the comparison between FA's means nothing to you as you have no understanding of it. We understand as line-by-line as we see and confirm the information via our paycheck and working environment.

Granted you will disagree no matter what, so discussing with you and the other DAL haters, NxNW, etc is moot. You and others wish nothing more then to burn down the DAL house as retribution for the NWA brand exiting the market place. You hated NWA then so, you hate DAL/NWA now and no matter what that will never change. Theres a certain camaraderie amongst union workers to complain about the company just for the sake of complaining. Even if offered a pot of gold for life those people will still complain.
 
Tell ya what aislehopper. Let's make a pact. If the union is voted down and this itemization of benefits you've provided doesn't change within 1 yr after the election, I will print the pdf out, eat it (without salad dressing), and never post on this website again . Conversely, if it does, you'll do the same. Deal?

The purpose of a discussion forum is to discuss issues. If everyone thought the same, it would be a pep rally. The ability to read and be exposed to diverse viewpoints from people that you might otherwise never meet is one of the benefits of this site and others like it.

I have been around here since 2002. I plan to stick around regardless of the outcome of the election. I hope that you will as well.
 
Allow me to help you understand what "cost" is.

NXNW:

I think that most of us around here understand costs. However, your original statement was "I guess this will put to rest who makes more between NW/DL"

Most people would read your statement as dealing with the earnings side of the equation, i.e. who makes more. However, you cited a chart on costs. Again, employees do not deposit costs into their checking account so your chart does not support your original statement.

In addition, you posted stale information. We are almost to 2009, and your cost chart does not recognize gains in earnings on the delta side.

In sum, the information that you posted does not support your contention that it "will put to rest who makes more between NW/DL."
 
NXNW:

I think that most of us around here understand costs. However, your original statement was "I guess this will put to rest who makes more between NW/DL"

Most people would read your statement as dealing with the earnings side of the equation, i.e. who makes more. However, you cited a chart on costs. Again, employees do not deposit costs into their checking account so your chart does not support your original statement.

In addition, you posted stale information. We are almost to 2009, and your cost chart does not recognize gains in earnings on the delta side.

In sum, the information that you posted does not support your contention that it "will put to rest who makes more between NW/DL."


The most recent YOY-year over year analysis is 2007 not 2008 or "almost" 2009 (same twilight zone logic you put on "employee compensation and costs") as the year is not even over.... We all have seen what Delta has "given" you for a raise this year, and by NO STRETCH of the imagination does it come anywhere NEAR $3,000 dollars.

My original statement is correct...unless you have some figures from a different Federal agency vs. cooked propaganda.

For one who states the cost of a company is irrellavent to the compensation of an employee group doesn't get it or doesn't want to get (then say later, they understand "costs")

The pay employees deposit is COSTS to the company regardless of your silly little game of semantics (which are beyond childish). The rain falling outside doesn't come from the ocean either, it just falls from outer space and the sky.

I think it is great that you have posted on here your perspective...it proves, sadly, the bizarre logic that some people carry at New Delta regarding their infallible New leaders.

Maybe I can help you "get it".

When a company such as DL pays you...what does the company consider that to be in financial terms?

Do you understand that as your compensation gets bigger, so does the "COSTS" of New Delta?

Do you understand what DL means when it publicly states that it has the lowest FA costs of all major carriers?

Do you know what cost means?

Do you know how to use money?

Do you know how to s p e a k (read)...E N G L I S H?

Do you know what day, month it is?
 
Kev,

As a ramp guy, looking at the comparison between FA's means nothing to you as you have no understanding of it. We understand as line-by-line as we see and confirm the information via our paycheck and working environment.

Granted you will disagree no matter what, so discussing with you and the other DAL haters, NxNW, etc is moot. You and others wish nothing more then to burn down the DAL house as retribution for the NWA brand exiting the market place. You hated NWA then so, you hate DAL/NWA now and no matter what that will never change. Theres a certain camaraderie amongst union workers to complain about the company just for the sake of complaining. Even if offered a pot of gold for life those people will still complain.


Got "Kev" on the brain do we?

"Kev"...has nothing to do with this.

I would venture "Kev" by the way has an above average grasp of FA pay, I certainly do after 25 years.

I resent your derogatory slur calling me a "Delta hater". Is that how you dress up your denial of the past behavioral reality of your new NW leaders?

Why in GOD'S name would NW people be upset at the NWA brand exiting when it is CLEAR as to why they kept the Delta name...and it's NOTHING you want to brag about. I can enlighten you AGAIN with the cold hard facts and figures. You would love to believe that we hated Northwest, yet you say we are angry because the brand is going away? You let me know if you'd like me to re post the "follow the money" cold facts as to why our New company is called Delta.

Let me help you out: We LOVED Northwest, it was our crooked, amateur greedy self serving leaders that we had a problem with (you know the ones). As one of the first passenger carrying airlines in the world, the one that invented the term "US Airmail"...it maintained a spectacular place in history, one with a stellar financial history (until your new bosses arrived)

In case you haven't noticed...YET. Most NW people are realist.

I think once our Unions are set...the people of NEW Delta (something you just can't seem to wrap your mind around) are going to be thrilled about our new company.
 
Do you know what cost means?

Do you know how to use money?

Do you know how to s p e a k (read)...E N G L I S H?

Do you know what day, month it is?

Ad hominem attacks aside, you are still wrong. Your statement was "I guess this will put to rest who makes more between NW/DL["

Frankly, it does not.

You are trying to use stale cost data to prove that NWA flight attendants currently make more than Delta flight attendants.

If you were stating that in 2007, NWA flight attendants cost more than Delta flight attendants, I would agree. Your D.O.T. data, if true, supports that. But to say that the 2007 cost data proves that NWA flight attendants make more than their Delta counterparts in 2008 is wrong.

You have the burden of proof to support your statement "I guess this will put to rest who makes more between NW/DL[" is true. IMHO, the fact that we are debating it proves the debate has not been put to rest. Furthemore, I feel that the underlying logic that you use to support your statement is also flawed.

Now, you can call me as many names as you want, but it does not change the fact that the people reading this will decide for themselves whether it has been "put to rest."
 
Kev,

As a ramp guy, looking at the comparison between FA's means nothing to you as you have no understanding of it. We understand as line-by-line as we see and confirm the information via our paycheck and working environment.

Granted you will disagree no matter what, so discussing with you and the other DAL haters, NxNW, etc is moot. You and others wish nothing more then to burn down the DAL house as retribution for the NWA brand exiting the market place. You hated NWA then so, you hate DAL/NWA now and no matter what that will never change. Theres a certain camaraderie amongst union workers to complain about the company just for the sake of complaining. Even if offered a pot of gold for life those people will still complain.


WTF are you talking about? I haven't even seen this thread until just now, let alone commented on it... Look close at whom you're quoting before you go off.

Also, never again make the mistake of assuming you know wether or not I "hate" anything, or where I'm coming from unless I've explained it previously.

Lastly, I never complain just for the sake of complaining. When I see something that's not right, you can bet I'll call upper mgmt. out on it. By the way, that's called caring about your company, not wanting to see it destroyed.


P.S. You got one part right in your little missive; there's is quite a bit of camaraderie between F/A's and Ground Ops people.
 
Ad hominem attacks aside, you are still wrong. Your statement was "I guess this will put to rest who makes more between NW/DL["

Frankly, it does not.

You are trying to use stale cost data to prove that NWA flight attendants currently make more than Delta flight attendants.

If you were stating that in 2007, NWA flight attendants cost more than Delta flight attendants, I would agree. Your D.O.T. data, if true, supports that. But to say that the 2007 cost data proves that NWA flight attendants make more than their Delta counterparts in 2008 is wrong.

You have the burden of proof to support your statement "I guess this will put to rest who makes more between NW/DL[" is true. IMHO, the fact that we are debating it proves the debate has not been put to rest. Furthermore, I feel that the underlying logic that you use to support your statement is also flawed.

Now, you can call me as many names as you want, but it does not change the fact that the people reading this will decide for themselves whether it has been "put to rest."


"Ad hominem attacks ?"

Are you for REAL? It is not I who is in denial of the facts. Facts you ignore by presenting some absurd argument that "your bi weekly pay-roll deposits" had nothing to do with "costs". Now if that is not a detour of the facts, hell is having a cold snap.

I..don't have the burden of anything. You have the burden of comprehending a reliable source vs. cooked propaganda (which you gleefully digest). Even the Delta person that published your INCOMPLETE analysis admits that it is "not exact". I don't remember seeing a statement of that kind on the DOT chart.

Interpretation of facts is not subjective in my book (the end result is the FACT). So, what you need to do is dispute the DOT data with the DOT...frankly, I think the DOT is a helluva lot more experienced at this than you and me.

The FACT remains...MULTIPLE sources agree (including OUR senior New Delta management) that you (pre-merger Delta) cost less (compensation) than all other majors. Moreover, your rolling date of analysis is just that...rolling, 2007, 2008, 2009...we'll be at 2010 soon.

The DOT chart certainly puts to rest the issue for me...and many others who know the difference between a neutral federal agency vs. cooked up propaganda that admits to cooking (you can't properly cook the recipe with only 1/2 the ingredients).

Instead of trying to shirt the facts, you should at least attempt to support your argument with neutral, reliable sources vs. some bizarre statement of pay has nothing to do with cost. Then turn around and claim sincerity of position and victim-hood.

If, I may be of assistance in publishing the new YOY DOT 2008 data (once it has been collected sometime in 2009) I will be more than happy to. In the mean time. Our work rules and return to pre bankruptcy compensation continues to improve.

What is telling...is the FACT that there are some from Old Delta that insist on not having a contract even though those at New Delta with out contracts have inferior compensation to those with the highest compensation (management, pilots, NW FAs, and others who are contractual). I would suggest those from Old Delta seek the best compensation possible from their current package while combining the best from NW into a NEW contract. This issue for me is about what ALL of my colleagues at New Delta can get in a new contract.

My position and argument is for the improvement of all under a NEW contract.
 
WTF are you talking about? I haven't even seen this thread until just now, let alone commented on it... Look close at whom you're quoting before you go off.

Also, never again make the mistake of assuming you know wether or not I "hate" anything, or where I'm coming from unless I've explained it previously.

Lastly, I never complain just for the sake of complaining. When I see something that's not right, you can bet I'll call upper mgmt. out on it. By the way, that's called caring about your company, not wanting to see it destroyed.


P.S. You got one part right in your little missive; there's is quite a bit of camaraderie between F/A's and Ground Ops people.

LOL, Sorry Kev I often get you two mixed up.
 
LOL, Sorry Kev I often get you two mixed up.


You little sweet angel.

That's the nicest thing you've said to me all Autumn!

Thank you for the gracious compliment. (truly)

You see...we can agree to disagree until we vote in our new unions. (your new contract will be just as resilient as our CEO and pilot's)

Once you go CONTRACT...you'll NEVER look back!