terms of DL-DALPA tentative agreement released.

[WorldTraveler]

no, robbed, I have said he has seen his profit sharing go up and it has.

He has never denied it because HE, not you, knows it is true.

You follow in the footsteps of you handler 700 who is simply trying to do everything to avoid admitting that the IAM like the APFA has played second fiddle to DL compensation for years and the only reason why 700 can talk about unionization efforts that have succeeded at other carriers is because they have paid their employees less than DL.

DL employees aren't hiring a union because they would have to take pay and compensation cuts to reach industry average which is all that any unionized employee can hope to get if the company is tired of paying out big salaries - which is exactly what is happeneing at WN.

and the weAAsle is lying plain and simple because the TWU has done an even worse job of protecting jobs and increasing pay htan even the IAM has done.

Union strategy 101 is to tell lies about your competitors' compensation to hide the fact that your union has utterly and completely failed.

#DLnon-unionemployeeadvantage
#allthewaytothebank

 

[Kev3188]

youre flat out wrong there WT on Kev PS    you claim he got 33%   yet he says no   Gee  for someone who is not active you sure seem to think you know what he gets and what he doesn't

Our PS payout formula was unilaterally changed. The reason payout(s) themselves increased is because employees helped generate industry record profits.

Those are two separate items, which some are happy to conflate.

The pilot and dispatcher groups don't have the same problem. They negotiate, and then the membership collectively decides whether to accept or decline said proposals.

 

[700UW]

Looks like the math has been done:
 

 
Here's the facts.
 
It's estimated that DL will report an operating profit of approximately $6.4 billion for 2015, $7 billion for 2016 and $7.5 in 2017.
 
That means $350 million will be removed from the profit sharing pool (10% X $3.5 billion) each year if DL reports a $6 billion operating profit.
 
That's about $1.1 BILLION taken from DL employees in the next three years.
 
DL bought (if ratified) the pilots' agreement via a new contract and the pilots will not lose a dime of compensation due to the reduction of the profit sharing pool.
 
Every other DL employee without the right to negotiate will lose money.
 
Your money will be transferred for other uses.
 
It's a sickening display of greed.
 

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

Somebody somewhere on this board said there is one size pie at delta. If the DL pilots get a larger slice, then the non-contract employees get a smaller slice.

 

[robbedagain]

glenn  thats sadly not how a certain dl cheerleader sees it

 

[WorldTraveler]

Somebody somewhere on this board said there is one size pie at delta. If the DL pilots get a larger slice, then the non-contract employees get a smaller slice.

there are all kinds of incorrect statements that are made on this board.

There is simply no truth whatsoever to the notion that an increase in salary for one group comes at the expense of another group.

DL said its 2012 contract for the pilots was cost neutral.

In case you have read it, DL is hitting hard in the 2015 pilot TA on sick time which DL has said for several years is a cost problem among pilots. DL is also addressing the ability of pilots to get bumped off of flights because of training/checkoff and get paid for it.

Both of those items are fairly big cost and productivity items that don't exist in other workgroups. The pilots are gaining more salary by fixing some of those pilot specific costs

It is only a fear tactic of union organizers to say that DL pilot increases will come at the expense of other workgroups. If they actually have something to back it up, they should put it on the table. They can't because there is no basis for their statements.

 

[eolesen]

Somebody somewhere on this board said there is one size pie at delta. If the DL pilots get a larger slice, then the non-contract employees get a smaller slice.

Yes and no.

First, there's more than one pie here. You've got three -- salary, benefits, and profit sharing.

It looks like DL made a decision to bake a larger salary pie. As long as the $$ value hasn't gone down, arguing that non-contract is getting a smaller % or a smaller slice is simply a silly argument to be making.

That said, it's entirely reasonable to argue that ALPA just gave DL justification to reduce what WT has painted as industry leading profit sharing. At UA a couple years ago back, ALPA took raises in lieu of profit sharing, and the company followed that by reducing non-contract profit sharing. It's also not out of the question to say DL may simply be following AA's lead -- not going to the extreme of taking profit sharing out of the compensation equation altogether, but by placing less of an emphasis on variable comp and placing more emphasis on guaranteed comp.
 
ALPA's simply reading the tea leaves here --- RASM has been dropping, and the days of industry leading profit sharing are probably numbered. Banking on record profit sharing payouts has never worked in the past. At best, it's worked for 3 or 4 years in a row, usually followed by little to no profit sharing for 3-5 years.

Useless?

Your clueless , MIT most respected source.

FWIW, Swelbar's stats at MIT have been unilaterally discredited by every union that's ever had those stats used against them at the bargaining table.

Now they're credible?

Wish you guys would be consistent...

 

[700UW]

I have been on two different negotiating committees and no one even brought up MIT data.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

FWIW, Swelbar's stats at MIT have been unilaterally discredited by every union that's ever had those stats used against them at the bargaining table.

Now they're credible?

Wish you guys would be consistent...

 
I have to agree with you here E.
 
While I've had fun with those here that swear by it, the report is indeed inaccurate - some of the most extreme examples of inaccuracy can be found in the UAL MX reports where it shows one year MX supposedly averaged a salary of $307,347 and between 2 other years where we supposedly went from 2,135 MX personnel to 15,036.

 

[WorldTraveler]

the MIT data is only as good as the data the companies provide to the DOT which is where MIT gets the data.

UA has provided garbage data to the DOT because it can get by with it and it provides the company with an advantage in the negotiations.

tell me what other airline has holes in the data that hasn't been fixed.... I don't see the problems with anyone else's data that I see with UA.

and the DOT data does roll up if someone takes the time to SEC and financial statement data... and that is partly how you know if it is accurate or not.

SEC data MUST be accurate or there are penalties for falsification. DOT data can be fudged by throwing stuff in one pot or the other. The SEC doesn't require a great deal of detail; DOT does.

and let's keep in mind that the airline industry is one of the few where you can get as much public data at so many levels about competitors. It honestly shouldn't be that way but it is.

and of course the reason why unions don't want to use DOT data - from MIT or not - is because it is facts and it is clear that unions rarely if ever make full, factual data comparisons.



and the real reason why DL and ALPA both want to get profit sharing down is because everyone recognizes that 20% of a frontline worker's salary in profit sharing is very excessive. If the company is doing as well as it is - and it can easily convert 5 or 6% of the profit sharing into base pay and still post industry leading levels of profit sharing, then everyone including Wall Street analysts would rather see more base pay and less profit sharing.

and $1.1 billion in profit sharing is not only airline industry leading profit sharing... there are very few corporations at all that pay that much out in profit sharing - certainly on an expense of $35-40 billion in revenues.

and again, DL has taken the position with this contract that they will increase pay even further but they want to fix some productivity issues which they see as costly to the company.

When union workers are at the top of the heap in an industry, the union has a choice of accepting the terms of increased pay or not increasing pay. WN employees are stuck in negotiations because that company isn't willing to give more pay right now... if they think hard about what they can get from their employees, they have got to be able to think of productivity improvements they can make as well to justify pay raises - but they aren't willing to do that for now.

and AA is willing to tell its employees that they have long-term contracts or simply that the union will have to give up something of value in order to get higher pay. AA and UA have doing that for years and have been very successful at it.

There is competitive value in having highly paid employees - WN has used it for years. but you have to be able to generate revenues to support them - which WN has done. Now as the industry is consolidating and DL has done a very good job of defending its hubs and consolidating its position in key markets like NYC and is gaining its share in key premium markets like LHR and is increasing its industry revenue premium in the process, DL is not afraid of passing along premium revenue to its employees but it also wants to make sure it is getting premium productivity from them and several parts of the contract are telling the DL pilots that they are going to have to meet the company where it needs help - something that is not difficult to do for the vast majority of the pilots.

 

[southwind]

Looks like the math has been done:

And having a union will guarantee a 20%/raise, over the next 3 years.......NOT!

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

the MIT data is only as good as the data the companies provide to the DOT which is where MIT gets the data.

UA has provided garbage data to the DOT because it can get by with it and it provides the company with an advantage in the negotiations.

tell me what other airline has holes in the data that hasn't been fixed.... I don't see the problems with anyone else's data that I see with UA.

and the DOT data does roll up if someone takes the time to SEC and financial statement data... and that is partly how you know if it is accurate or not.

 
THE - REPORT - IS - INACCURATE 
 
Its not just UAL - those are easy to use as examples simply because they're the most glaring - the team that wrote the report themselves state that its inaccurate .
 

...Because of differing reporting methods by various airlines, it is also not possible to accurately calculate average salary and benefits for the various classes and crafts of ground and related employees....
 

 
When it comes to this report I don't care which side of the argument you're on - pro union or anti union - it doesn't matter. You cannot use a report, that itself cites its inaccuracies, as any sort of credible foundation for that subject. 

 

[WorldTraveler]

of course the report is totally inaccurate and unusable... so instead let's not compare ANY real data that shows what employees actually GET and not just what is on paycharts that don't reflect distribution of seniority etc.

and, a mechanic is not an FA or a pilot at any of the big 4 airlines which is how the report categorizes employees.

and you can divide up costs among projects but FA expenses are not accrued to mechanic salary expenses.

They simply are not.

to pretend that nothing is usable and that no valid comparison can be made so you instead use unprovable union claims is precisely why UNIONS are distrusted.

If you had valid data that showed your point then it would be entertained. But to throw out ALL data and instead rely on union generated propaganda will never win an argument.

unions have no problem figuring out that B6 pilots were underpaid relative to their peers at other airlines and that airline X' benefit costs are more than at others; if you can't accept the data that is available and can't generate your own which can be tested and verified, then mgmt. drives the process because they have the data and they will use it.

Ignoring something just because you don't like it is and never has been a successful strategy.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

of course the report is totally inaccurate and unusable... so instead let's not compare ANY real data that shows what employees actually GET and not just what is on paycharts that don't reflect distribution of seniority etc.

and, a mechanic is not an FA or a pilot at any of the big 4 airlines which is how the report categorizes employees.

and you can divide up costs among projects but FA expenses are not accrued to mechanic salary expenses.

They simply are not.

to pretend that nothing is usable and that no valid comparison can be made so you instead use unprovable union claims is precisely why UNIONS are distrusted.

If you had valid data that showed your point then it would be entertained. But to throw out ALL data and instead rely on union generated propaganda will never win an argument.

unions have no problem figuring out that B6 pilots were underpaid relative to their peers at other airlines and that airline X' benefit costs are more than at others; if you can't accept the data that is available and can't generate your own which can be tested and verified, then mgmt. drives the process because they have the data and they will use it.

Ignoring something just because you don't like it is and never has been a successful strategy.

 
You want to know what else has never has been a successful strategy .... deliberately taking a post out of context to fit your narrative - most especially when it exposes your own hypocrisy as you're taking 700 to task on in an adjacent thread.
 
I have never engaged in the Delta pilot salary PS argument
 
I have never engaged in the Delta vs American FA salary PS argument
 
I challenge you to prove otherwise.
 
While this thread is about the Delta Pilot TA, I was responding to E's  accurate criticism of some pro union posters use of the MIT report, with which I agreed.
 
Other than toying with you and others that try to hold the report as unquestionable I have ALWAYS voiced my concern about the reports inaccuracies and I have done so since its introduction to this forum several months ago or more - And as you were involved in a great many of those threads you will recall that they we about GROUND Employees. My post are all there for anyone to see for themselves - I NEVER argued Pilot or FA salaries - I cited the glaring UA mechanics data, and the reports own clear statement on its inaccuracies.
 
Nice Try

 

[WorldTraveler]

I didn't write specifically to you.

the world doesn't revolve around you.

I have also never said that any data is flawless.

but for anyone to argue that it can't be used because it might contain errors and no other data is available to show what employees actually get, and not just what is on a pay scale, is disingenuous at best.