According to what I saw from the MEC, of 10,864 eligible Delta pilots, 10,170, or 94 percent cast their vote. Of those, 6,327, or 62 percent voted “In Favor” of the agreement. The agreement will become effective on Sunday, July 1, 2012. Once implemented, the PWA will continue in full force and effect through December 31, 2015.

Good for them. Good move., and it wasn't even close it appears.

Is this the agreement that will allow mainline pilots to fly the 717, as well as Delta Connection flying more 76-seat RJs?

Great news! Good for pilots and good for Delta.

It doesn't surprise me that it passed. But I still believe it to be a poor deal for the pilots. It's a nearly toothless union.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 4): But I still believe it to be a poor deal for the pilots.

Why?

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 4): But I still believe it to be a poor deal for the pilots. It's a nearly toothless union.

There's always going to be those who think it's not good enough but it was obviously good enough for a majority to approve it. Makes me think of the quote from Joe Kennedy when Jack beat Niixon in the 1960 Presidential campaign by the smallest margin..he said "why should I pay for a landslide when any win will do". It's not in Delta's interest to have 100% of pilots approve because that would signify Delta giving the farm away.

So how many more CRJ900s with 76 seats will be headed to the DL Connection carriers? Good news for Bombardier, I'm sure.

Quoting KingAir200 (Reply 5): Why?

Because it's a compromise deal for the pilots in an economic situation where they held all the cards. This was their chance to get the contract they wanted. Coming to an agreement this early means someone didn't even try to play the game. That side was the union. There's not a lot of fight in that group. The company is a big winner here.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 8):

Have you seen the contract? Or at least the big provisions of it?

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 4): It doesn't surprise me that it passed. But I still believe it to be a poor deal for the pilots. It's a nearly toothless union.

Obviously, the pilots, who are probably more knowledgeable than you are about their contracts, don't agree. Toothless union or not, if the pilots hadn't liked the deal, they probably would have rejected it.

Quoting flyhossd (Reply 7): So how many more CRJ900s with 76 seats will be headed to the DL Connection carriers? Good news for Bombardier, I'm sure.

It hasn't been decided whether the 76-seat RJs will be CRJ-900s or E-175s. It could go either way, since I heard that NW seemed to have a preference of the E-175 over the CR9. The CR9 has a lower fuel burn, while the E-175 has more range and cargo capacity, as well as a more comfortable cabin.

[Edited 2012-06-29 11:17:42]

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 8): Coming to an agreement this early means someone didn't even try to play the game.

That's a simplistic view. There are real benefits to management and union alike from arriving at an early agreement. Labor strife is profoundly damaging to companies. It scares away some customers, makes the remaining customers feel like no one is focused on serving them, damages the company's image with the public, and makes it much harder for the union and management to work together productively on the little things that can save the company money and improve conditions for the workforce. When the company is doing reasonably well, it's easier for management and the union to put together an agreement that truly benefits both sides. If they can do so, then there's a meaningful, quantifiable advantage in getting the agreement signed as soon as possible rather than dragging the process out to try to get a few more concessions.

Kudos to management and union alike.

Quoting DL WIDGET HEAD (Reply 6): There's always going to be those who think it's not good enough but it was obviously good enough for a majority to approve it. Makes me think of the quote from Joe Kennedy when Jack beat Niixon in the 1960 Presidential campaign by the smallest margin..he said "why should I pay for a landslide when any win will do". It's not in Delta's interest to have 100% of pilots approve because that would signify Delta giving the farm away.

In light of all the uninformed analysis on this board that suggested this TA was some kind of strategic error by DALPA which would lead to decertification, I would say that ratification with 62% of the vote is absolutely a landslide.

Quoting KingAir200 (Reply 9): Have you seen the contract? Or at least the big provisions of it?

I've seen all the main points of the deal. But what's specifically in the contract is largely irrelevant. The union's bargaining power at this stage is definitely not as high as what it would have been later. There's essentially no chance that this was the best deal they could have negotiated. On the contrary this was probably the best deal that the company could have asked for.

Quoting mayor (Reply 10): Obviously, the pilots, who are probably more knowledgeable than you are about their contracts, don't agree. Toothless union or not, if the pilots hadn't liked the deal, they probably would have rejected it.

My background in labor economics means that I don't even have to be that knowledgeable about the details to tell them that they didn't get the best deal. But obviously it was good enough for the majority, so they'll have to live with their decision.

And scope industry wide will continue to crumble, mark my words on this! I am actually surprised it passed with such a high margin, seeing as though most Delta guys I talked to were against this TA!

Either way, now that the new contract is in place, expect a major shakeup in the Delta Connection world with a significant reduction in 50 RJ 200s! It's going to be an interesting few years in the regional world!

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 14): But obviously it was good enough for the majority, so they'll have to live with their decision.

Well, that's the whole point of "majority rules", isn't it? Maybe the "majority" (and the MEC) thought this what was best for them AND the company, whereas if they got the best deal for themselves, later, it might not have been what was best for the overall company.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 14): My background in labor economics means that I don't even have to be that knowledgeable about the details to tell them that they didn't get the best deal. But obviously it was good enough for the majority, so they'll have to live with their decision.

If by "economics" you really mean "ideology," then your logic makes sense. Anyone with actual training in financial or economic analysis would appreciate the elegance of this deal and the risks each side had to take in order for it to happen.

The majority of Delta pilots are owed a debt of gratitude for saving the DPA guys from their own stupidity.

Now maybe I get to see a 717 in DL colors side by side to a DC9 in DL colors.

What is that expression? the Alpha and the Omega?

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 14): The union's bargaining power at this stage is definitely not as high as what it would have been later. There's essentially no chance that this was the best deal they could have negotiated.

This sort of thinking assumes that the negotiation process itself has no effect on the company's business and that the negotiation is a zero-sum game over a fixed amount of income. That's wrong, and it's the sort of thinking that gets unions and management alike in a lot of trouble. The union might have been able to get a bit more of the pie by holding out and kicking up dirt -- but there's a good chance that if they had done so then the whole pie would have shrunk by more than the union gained.

[Edited 2012-06-29 12:07:59]

Quoting DL WIDGET HEAD (Reply 6): Makes me think of the quote from Joe Kennedy when Jack beat Niixon in the 1960 Presidential campaign by the smallest margin..he said "why should I pay for a landslide when any win will do

Close. Actually it went like this, "Don't buy a single vote more than necessary. I'll be damned if I'm going to pay for a landslide."

I was reading another forum on this issue, and the whole pilot issue aside this is going to have a huge impact on their existing regional deals, and no one save for possibly GoJet, Compass, and Shuttle America will be immune from this. The immediate impact obviously is on the 50 seat market, which will have to be significantly trimmed down. Delta does own a lot of 50 seaters, but most of these are with either Comair or Pinnacle. Pinnacle is curently in bankruptcy, and this development is going to complicate that even more. The one thing to note though is that of the 200's that DL owns, most of the ones with Pinnacle are among the newest ones flying with any regional. If Pinnacle can get a favorable contract in the bankruptcy court, then I would expect them to maintain a lot of the 200 flying. The problem is DL does not want all of it at one carrier after the Comair strike. This could actually be the end of Comair because those are the older 200's and the pilots are very senior as well.

ExpressJet and Skywest are going to be hugely impacted by this. The big problem both carriers are going to have is if DL trims their 200 flying, they may be stuck with 200's that have no home but they still have leases on. Replacing that flying with some 700 and 900's will lessen the sting, but there is still a cost to owning or leasing planes you cannot fly.

My guess is that Pinnacle, Skywest and ExpressJet will take some hits on this, but combined will handle all the 200 flying that is left. But Skywest Inc. is going to take a financial hit on this down the road.

Also, with a reduction in that much 200 flying, could DL just completely say its time to pull the plug on MEM and CVG? Also keep an eye on the MSP hub, which while I don't think it will take a big hit, I think it will be reduced a bit because of this.


Finally, congrats to both sides for getting this done in a timely manner. I may have wanted to see more scope in this, but given the way the market is working right now that problem may be solved down the road.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 4):

Yes, they should fight management like AA, US, and UA pilots are doing.   That's going really well for them! I admire the way DL pilots and management can get along. A big reason why I want to work for them one day. Oh well, can't make everyone happy, at least 2/3s were (a pretty good margin, you see 51-55% passing a lot of time)

Quoting cbphoto (Reply 15):

Yes, too bad we added some 100 seaters to mainline! Too bad we're making the company healthier by reducing 50 seaters and increasing 76 seaters, LOCKED in a ration (DL can't just remove mainline and add regional all they want.) There is going to be a net GAIN in mainline and net LOSS in regional seats... did you even read the contract???

Quoting mayor (Reply 16): whereas if they got the best deal for themselves, later, it might not have been what was best for the overall company.

A competent union can't care about the health of the company when negotiating. Only the company knows what it can and can't accept from the union, and it won't tell the union what that is. And it goes the other way too. The company can't care about the union, because only the union knows what it can and can't accept. If you try to play nice and accept whatever number the other side initially asks for, you just accepted the worst deal for you. That doesn't mean you took a pay cut or anything like that. It just means you gained the least or lost the most.

Maybe some believe that just because there's a union involved it means that it's a strong one that drives a hard bargain and gets the best deal for them. That's just not true. This has the hallmarks of a weak union and a great deal for Delta. Remember, this is a glorious time for the pilots to need a new contract. The airlines are profitable again. Instead the union bought the car at the asking price.

Quoting goldenstate (Reply 17): If by "economics" you really mean "ideology," then your logic makes sense. Anyone with actual training in financial or economic analysis would appreciate the elegance of this deal and the risks each side had to take in order for it to happen. The majority of Delta pilots are owed a debt of gratitude for saving the DPA guys from their own stupidity.

Economics is a science, the antithesis of an ideology. It's isn't my ideology that says the company got a good deal, it's the unbreakable science that tells me who did.

In the end the voters for the contract are pilots. They don't know how this works. This isn't their expertise. They have to rely on the union leaders. If those leaders aren't strong in negotiating, this is the type of deal they will get.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 23): A competent union can't care about the health of the company when negotiating.

That is so, so wrong. The union's job is to maximize the return (speaking in terms of both compensation and working conditions) for its employees. There may well be a time when the greatest total return will be a slightly smaller slice of a larger pie; in other words, when the union makes a concession that makes it easier for the company to grow. Negotiating on behalf of a union without taking the company's health into account is just like negotiating for your car without knowing in advance what works best for the dealer. Negotiations are not a zero-sum game. The very most effective negotiation is one that creates value that didn't exist before, the benefits of which both sides can enjoy. Both sides need as much information as possible for there to be any possibility of creating value. Acrimonious negotiations, public fighting, and missed deadlines, by contrast, destroy value and make it harder for both sides to benefit.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 23): If you try to play nice and accept whatever number the other side initially asks for, you just accepted the worst deal for you.

I see no evidence that either side did this. Not every successful negotiation has to come down to the last second.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 23): This has the hallmarks of a weak union and a great deal for Delta.

If anything, I worry that Delta gave away the store to the pilots in exchange for what is really a fairly small expansion of scope. I'm more confident that this is a good deal for the union than that it's a good deal for Delta.

[Edited 2012-06-29 13:14:34]

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 23): A competent union can't care about the health of the company when negotiating.

It's this type of thinking that doomed United in the mid 90's. Wasn't UA chief negotiating pilot Dubinsky the one who said "we don't want to kill the golden goose. We just want to choke it by the neck until it gives us every last egg". Well, we see how that philosophy turned out. I'm glad that most Delta pilots realize that we're in this together and that if we have a healthy company then they will have a healthy career.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 12): Labor strife is profoundly damaging to companies.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 12): It scares away some customers, makes the remaining customers feel like no one is focused on serving them, damages the company's image with the public, and makes it much harder for the union and management to work together productively on the little things that can save the company money and improve conditions for the workforce.

Labour peace has been non-existent at AA for decades, the anit-union folk will say it finally led to their Chpt.11 while at the same time saying that AA should have done so years ago to reduce the union influence.
US Airways unions have been at loggerheads with East, West, North and all points in between, management seems to have taken hands off and yet they turned a profit.

If anything it may highlight the professionalism of the average worker where in spite of all the turmoil around them they still show up everyday and fullfill their obligations to the company, something like it's a dirty job but someone has to do it.

Interesting times indeed.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 23): Economics is a science, the antithesis of an ideology. It's isn't my ideology that says the company got a good deal, it's the unbreakable science that tells me who did.

Your definition of each party's interests is extremely narrow. I suspect this is because such a narrow set of interests conveniently fits within a political ideology that assumes inherently conflicting interests of workers and those who employ them.

To suggest your views are based on "unbreakable science" only reinforces the absurdity of your pretension to any meaningful breadth of experience or expertise in financial or economic analysis.

In order to widen your horizons, you might want to read about integrative bargaining theory. Would also be helpful to think about this negotiation within the context of Delta's strategic position relative to other airlines.

Finally, you might examine the track record of airline unions that have negotiated in a manner that shows no concern for the ability of the enterprise to generate economic value. In short, the strategy you advocate has proven to be disastrous for the interests of all stakeholders: labor, management, shareholders, and customers.

[Edited 2012-06-29 13:48:17]

Where is the one poster that said there's no way in hell it would pass and all this TAU will do is bring down ALPA and open the door for the DPA group?

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 30): Where is the one poster that said there's no way in hell it would pass and all this TAU will do is bring down ALPA and open the door for the DPA group?

Out to lunch..............eating pie???????????

Great to hear. Time to start painting...........

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 4): It's a nearly toothless union.

You call it toothless. I call it a sign of the times we are in.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 8): Because it's a compromise deal for the pilots in an economic situation where they held all the cards.

What planet are you on? Lol.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 8): The company is a big winner here.

Company wins, pilots win. That's how it is my friend. Stop the constant division tactics.
DL has it figured out right now. They have a certain vision for the company and they are willing to make things work in order for this vision to become reality. This ain't your Lorenzo company. The (majority) of pilots smell the goodness and good intent from management, and they approve.

You can't make everyone happy. Higher "yes" voting numbers simply aren't needed. The company knows this. What is DL, a company for pilots or a company with a lot more folks than just the pilots? I thought so. Geez.

[Edited 2012-06-29 14:23:08]

Quoting goldenstate (Reply 29): Finally, you might examine the track record of airline unions that have negotiated in a manner that shows no concern for the ability of the enterprise to generate economic value. In short, the strategy you advocate has proven to be disastrous for the interests of all stakeholders: labor, management, shareholders, and customers.

  

And I say this as someone who generally has sympathies opposite to those of goldenstate.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 24): That is so, so wrong.

It maybe sounds wrong, but it's true. It's not their job to look out for the company in negotiations. If the company is run competently, it knows exactly what it can and can't accept from the union. Remember, the pilots are just one piece of the cost of running an airline. There is no possible way for the union to have a better idea than the company of how much their costs affects the company's bottom line. It's naive to think that your small piece is the straw that breaks the camel's back. It won't be. The company will succeed or fail based on factors far beyond just your pay scale. So you worry about your own bacon and let the company worry about theirs.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 24): Acrimonious negotiations, public fighting, and missed deadlines, by contrast, destroy value and make it harder for both sides to benefit.

They certainly can sometimes, but if you're the side with the advantage, as the pilots are in the current airline economy, you should be using that threat to your advantage. But if you're not going to play the game, like they did here, your union might be worthless, or nearly so. All it does take dues and give little to nothing back. I believe many airline unions are in that boat.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 24): I see no evidence that either side did this. Not every successful negotiation has to come down to the last second.

Well, I do. The deal is very much a compromise deal. The pilots gave up significantly in the one area they're concerned about the most (scope). It was completed very early on, and I didn't see any side have to use basic tactics to strengthen their bargaining power. It was sit down, trade some ideas, and voila, a new deal.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 24): If anything, I worry that Delta gave away the store to the pilots in exchange for what is really a fairly small expansion of scope. I'm more confident that this is a good deal for the union than that it's a good deal for Delta.

The last thing I would do is worry about Delta. They know far more about their bottom line their pilots do. If this was not a good deal for Delta, there is no chance this would be completed already. That scope increase is huge for them. Huge.

It's real simple. Right now the environment is favorable for labor. Airlines are making money, and employees want their piece of it, especially with all the concessions they've made over the years. Now is not the best time to negotiate if you're the airline. Do you think that a deal done this quickly and quietly could be a home run for the union? No way. The company would have drug their feet in some way. They have to be pleased with this deal.

Quoting DL WIDGET HEAD (Reply 27): It's this type of thinking that doomed United in the mid 90's.

Couldn't have been. The quote you have there should be the goal of every union in negotiations. The union is never trying to to kill the goose. It's self-destructive! Remember, the company and union are dependent on each other. Either side simply wants the most they can get out of it based on their goals (wage rate, employment level, etc.).

Quoting catiii (Thread starter): 94 percent cast their vote.

As always, I have to ask; Who are the 6% that sat this out, and why are they so apathetic about their career?!

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 11): It hasn't been decided whether the 76-seat RJs will be CRJ-900s or E-175s. It could go either way,

JMHO, but I sure hope it's the latter.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 12): If they can do so, then there's a meaningful, quantifiable advantage in getting the agreement signed as soon as possible rather than dragging the process out to try to get a few more concessions.

...And lots and lots of $$$ thrown their way never hurts, either...

Quoting mayor (Reply 16): Maybe the "majority" (and the MEC) thought this what was best for them AND the company, whereas if they got the best deal for themselves, later, it might not have been what was best for the overall company.

Well, the results clearly indicate that the majority of the group felt it was in *their* best interest. I'm not sure the welfare of the rest of the company really weighs to heavily on the average line pilot.


Going forward, it will be interesting to me to see how other groups on the property react to the agreed to terms, especially now that the company is touting it as "industry leading" while consistently telling us to settle for "industry standard."

Like others have already noted, this could totally revise the DCI landscape here as well, and I'm curious to see what it'll look like when all is said & done.

[Edited 2012-06-29 15:17:05 by srbmod]

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 33): If the company is run competently, it knows exactly what it can and can't accept from the union.

...which is exactly why the union needs to know that too. If the union is missing information the company has, that gives the company an unfair advantage in negotiations (as well as potentially causing the union to miss good opportunities to create value for both sides). You are advocating a negotiating approach that would do severe harm to the union as well as the company.

You wouldn't negotiate with a car dealer without knowing his invoice price, likely profit, and the incentives he's being offered by his supplier. This is the same principle.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 33): It's naive to think that your small piece is the straw that breaks the camel's back. It won't be.

Poor union contracts did break all the legacies' back, as we are currently watching at AA. There is one reason they all went into Chapter 11 and that reason is labor costs. Both the unions and management were to blame for those contracts, in part because both sides used a negotiating approach exactly like the one you advocate, and thus created contracts that were punitive for both sides (i.e., destroying a lot of value), not cooperative.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 33): Do you think that a deal done this quickly and quietly could be a home run for the union? No way.

Is the goal a "home run" that punishes the company, or something that allows both the union and the company to prosper? When you are negotiating with someone with whom you'll have a long-term relationship, do you try to squeeze every last penny out of him no matter what destruction it entails, or do you try to find a solution that makes both you and him want to work together in the future?

Frankly, I wouldn't want someone with your punitive approach negotiating for me if I was a union member. When I used to be, our local had leaders with a lot more foresight, and I remain grateful for it.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 22): Yes, too bad we added some 100 seaters to mainline! Too bad we're making the company healthier by reducing 50 seaters and increasing 76 seaters, LOCKED in a ration (DL can't just remove mainline and add regional all they want.) There is going to be a net GAIN in mainline and net LOSS in regional seats... did you even read the contract???

Uhh...yeah I read the contract, and i'll one up you by saying not only did I read the contract, I have also talked to many Delta pilots who will live and work under the contract. While opinions differ, the overall impression I got is that this is still a step backwards in scope! It's great that overall seats will be reduced in the regional division, but the bigger RJs are precisely the aircraft that replace mainline routes. They also agreed that this will be a step backwards industry wide, as more airlines will look to increase aircraft size in their TAs. Any large RJs being added to the scope of an airline is a bad thing, no matter what!

Quoting apodino (Reply 21): I was reading another forum on this issue, and the whole pilot issue aside this is going to have a huge impact on their existing regional deals, and no one save for possibly GoJet, Compass, and Shuttle America will be immune from this. The immediate impact obviously is on the 50 seat market, which will have to be significantly trimmed down. Delta does own a lot of 50 seaters, but most of these are with either Comair or Pinnacle. Pinnacle is curently in bankruptcy, and this development is going to complicate that even more. The one thing to note though is that of the 200's that DL owns, most of the ones with Pinnacle are among the newest ones flying with any regional. If Pinnacle can get a favorable contract in the bankruptcy court, then I would expect them to maintain a lot of the 200 flying. The problem is DL does not want all of it at one carrier after the Comair strike. This could actually be the end of Comair because those are the older 200's and the pilots are very senior as well. ExpressJet and Skywest are going to be hugely impacted by this. The big problem both carriers are going to have is if DL trims their 200 flying, they may be stuck with 200's that have no home but they still have leases on. Replacing that flying with some 700 and 900's will lessen the sting, but there is still a cost to owning or leasing planes you cannot fly. My guess is that Pinnacle, Skywest and ExpressJet will take some hits on this, but combined will handle all the 200 flying that is left. But Skywest Inc. is going to take a financial hit on this down the road.

Exactly, let the regional shakeup begin! I have a feeling Comair will not make it through this mix up and will either be dissolved or merged into another company. The only regional I really see gaining from this mess is unfortunately Gojet, which will get more along the ways of 700/900s! Pinnacle/Skywest/Expressjet by far have the most to loose, with Pinnacle leading the way!

Quoting nwaesc (Reply 34): As always, I have to ask; Who are the 6% that sat this out, and why are they so apathetic about their career?!

A large number of that 6% could either be on military leave, FMLA leave, or if I am not mistaken not in good standing with union dues! I believe if you are on Military leave or FMLA leave, you are ineligible to vote!

Quoting nwaesc (Reply 34): As always, I have to ask; Who are the 6% that sat this out, and why are they so apathetic about their career?!

Maybe they were exactly 50/50% on the fence and could go either way  

Quoting nwaesc (Reply 34): Well, the results clearly indicate that the majority of the group felt it was in *their* best interest. I'm not sure the welfare of the rest of the company really weighs to heavily on the average line pilot.

I don't think so... to be an airline pilot, you gotta be smart. At least 1 DL pilot (my dad) considers the well-being of the company along with his well-being. Kinda stupid not to...

Quoting cbphoto (Reply 36): Uhh...yeah I read the contract, and i'll one up you by saying not only did I read the contract, I have also talked to many Delta pilots who will live and work under the contract.

I do indeed know a bunch of DL pilots (my dad is even one.) Maybe I talked more with the 2/3 that voted yes and you talked more to the 1/3 who voted no lol. The biggest gripe I heard was that the TA could be "a little bit better..." but smartly (IMO) they didn't vote No because who knows how long it would take to get a contract and how much better would it really be (might be a little better but you could miss raises for a year or two while fighting it)

Quoting cbphoto (Reply 36): but the bigger RJs are precisely the aircraft that replace mainline routes. They also agreed that this will be a step backwards industry wide, as more airlines will look to increase aircraft size in their TAs. Any large RJs being added to the scope of an airline is a bad thing, no matter what!

No matter what? That's an opinion, and an opinion 2/3 of DL pilots seem to disagree with. Who cares if some CRJ-900s take some routes that used to be mainline... there will be more mainline and less regional. It will not be some invasion of RJs because the ratio is locked... sure, DL could get a bunch more 76 seaters, but they'd first have to get more mainline jets. Could DL just try and undercut the pilots and remove a bunch of mainline jets after putting the 76-seaters in place? Yes, but they'd first have to slash a bunch of 76-seaters.

Kudos to DL pilots and management for not dragging the company into the flames of labor dispute. Just watch the commotion over at the other airlines...

how sad.
Once again DALPA proves its useless and the carrot and the stick works. Good job on Delta's part, they got most of the contract to be worse than JCBA minus pay. Oh well.


but hey, 35%(i think it is) of new pilots will come from a ALPA carrier. I guess they have that going for them.            

When do they get the first 717?

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 8): The company is a big winner here.

As it should be. No Company = No paycheck

Quoting cbphoto (Reply 36): let the regional shakeup begin!

Let it not. That sector of the industry needs some stability in a VERY bad way.

-Mir

I love how people think they know what's best for others...

They voted. Let's get over it.

Quoting etops1 (Reply 39): When do they get the first 717?

16 starting mid 2013, 36 in 2014 and 36 in 2015

Quoting nwaesc (Reply 46): I never said they were stupid. What I am saying is that they likely think of their career expectations first. Some like your dad may take a step back and look at the big picture, but IIMO he's the exception, not the rule.

I don't know... maybe it's because the pilots I talk to live near Atlanta, Georgia which is mostly Republican and more pro-business. Sorry, not trying to drag politics into it, just some anecdotal things I've seen. I could be completely wrong. In fact, I think it more has to do with the Delta culture. As of now (and for a while) there has been relative peace between Delta pilots and Delta management. Maybe the pilots don't get 100% of what they want always, but most of them don't think they're getting screwed.

With the Northwest guys, there seems to be a different culture *Not saying one is better than the other* but it seems that some disagreements often arise between the two groups. It will be interesting to see how they cooperate/don't cooperate in the future. It would also be interesting to see how the two pilot groups (pmDL and pmNW) voted, but I doubt management would release that and cause tension among the ranks. We kept the DL name and paintjob, but we are just as much NW as DL

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 14): I've seen all the main points of the deal. But what's specifically in the contract is largely irrelevant. The union's bargaining power at this stage is definitely not as high as what it would have been later. There's essentially no chance that this was the best deal they could have negotiated. On the contrary this was probably the best deal that the company could have asked for.

They would have received far less if they let it go down the path. It's a good deal for the pilots and while its not Pre-BK for the pilots, its still one heck of a deal and both sides win.

Quoting cbphoto (Reply 50): I would have rather have seen a slight reduction in the 50 seaters, while no new 76 seaters be added to the scope, as opposed to the current contract.

That would run into the business reality that soon there will be no economic point to most 50-seat flying. The airlines need to be able to upgauge the regional aircraft for the regional business to survive. 100 or 130 seats? No. At those capacities mainline economics make more sense, and the pilots should stick to their guns. But I think allowing for more 76-seaters is just recognizing economic reality.

Quoting MSPNWA (Reply 23): Remember, this is a glorious time for the pilots to need a new contract. The airlines are profitable again. Instead the union bought the car at the asking price.

  

Since when is it the worker's job to take care of the company? It's the worker's job to fulfill his contractual obligations to the company, and he must have a say in his contract.

Quoting mayor (Reply 16): Maybe the "majority" (and the MEC) thought this what was best for them AND the company, whereas if they got the best deal for themselves, later, it might not have been what was best for the overall company.

If they had gotten the best deal for themselves later, they would have been able to call themselves men. That's a terribly sexist thing to say, but contract negotiations are all about balls. What is best for the company is really what's best for those who control it strategically and receive compensation packages that dwarf those of the pilots. Those same people claim to act in the interest of investors, but it's all about them and their performance at the end of the day. DL stock is still below $12, well beneath its initial price. That's mostly because of the general economic environment, but it does show how little control executive management has over the fate of shareholders.

Quoting usdcaguy (Reply 52): Since when is it the worker's job to take care of the company?

   How shortsighted can you get? As a worker, I want to have a company.

Quoting usdcaguy (Reply 52): If they had gotten the best deal for themselves later, they would have been able to call themselves men. That's a terribly sexist thing to say, but contract negotiations are all about balls.

   I see. So you're an effeminate wuss if you create value but a "man" if you destroy it to prove a point. That's a heck of a way to succeed in business.

Quoting usdcaguy (Reply 52): What is best for the company is really what's best for those who control it strategically and receive compensation packages that dwarf those of the pilots.

There is a lot of truth to this, but negotiating destructively because of it is cutting off your nose to spite your face. The goal of negotiations shouldn't be to express so much "manly" anger about ridiculous exec comp that you prevent the company from growing. It should be to grow the company and then get as much of the benefits of the growth for the workers as possible.

Quoting usdcaguy (Reply 52): it does show how little control executive management has over the fate of shareholders.

Not true within the industry. Management has no control over what happens to the industry as a whole, but it very much controls how the company performs relative to the rest of the industry. DL is in the catbird seat in the US airline industry right now (even if the industry as a whole is in the dumps) Good decisions by management are a big part of the reason why. From my outside perspective, it looks like the union went about claiming a bunch of that success for its members (in the form of increased pay and increased mainline flying) in a very smart way.

Quoting cbphoto (Reply 50): If an airline were take in 90% of the flying to mainline, but in return contract out 100, or even 130 seat flying to a regional, would you say that is a success in the scope?

Wait, is that in the TA? I thought it was just more 76 seaters which they already fly anyway. 50 seaters are just too uneconomical...