mikepa

Would flying those international routes cut down on the "additional" non-flying hours too? I could imagine a pilot on DL55/56 to and from Narita would only have to do 2 trips a month to get to 60 hours. Do they get paid for the time they sleep in the rest quarters too?

(Clearly this sort of run is the exception to the general rule, but it clearly has some merit. You could work 8 days a month and still get your hours. 2 x 4 day trips ATL-NRT)

FlyDeltasJets

Mike,

You are correct, longer flights do reduce the number of non-flying duty hours. And yes, the pilots get paid while taking their FAA required rests. The responsibility does not end when they close their eyes, nor should the pay.

FYI, few pilots are satisfied with only 60 hours of flight time, and the airline wants us to fly more as well. Most lines are built closer to 75 hours.

Hope this answers your questions.

FWAAA

In 2001, DL pilots flew 45 hours per month, on average, while UA's pilots flew the stunning 36 hours per month average that several have quoted.

Source: USDoT and UAL

See internal pages 53-54 and PDF pages 57-58 of:

Link to UAL Brief Containing 2001 Pilot Flight Averages

DL pilots were 25% more productive, on average, than UA's pilots in 2001. If that has continued, they deserve to be paid more than UA's pilots.

According to this group of AA pilots, AA's pilots' rates now lag DL's by 43%. If true, expect DL to want to bring its pay rates in line with AA's and UA's. Expect DL's pilots to react negatively to such a suggestion.

[This message has been edited by FWAAA (edited 05-01-2003).]

T/BE20/G

Here's a real-world example of an international schedule from when I was an intern at Delta.

I jumpseated (yes, this was pre-9/11 so that was allowed) ATL-FCO-ATL, and talked quite a bit with the outbound crew about the job. That particular captain told me that he had held the same schedule for several months, and it consisted of the same trip flown approximately weekly

Day 1 (Saturday, for example): Depart ATL around 5pm

Day 2 (Sunday, in this case): Arrive Rome around 9am

Day 3 (Monday): Depart Rome around 11am, arrive at ATL around 4pm

As you can see from the times, the gate-to-gate-to-gate time is just a hair under 48 hours, but it's considered a 3-day trip because it occurs on three days. The total block time is in the neighborhood of 19 hours or so, but the pilots of course arrive early at JFK for preflight prep, so the total working time is a bit more. Segment-wise, international schedules don't have much flying, but, like FlyDeltaJets said, they can be very tiring.

mikepa

Thanks very much for the insights FlyDeltaJets... at least you have my converted.... One more question ...

Do most pilots stick to the same route each time? I’m just wondering about the pilots who fly ATL-NRT - to get to 75 hours they’d have to do 2 ˝ trips a month. Or is the 75 hours a month in any 30 days period so they could just plan the trips so a “new month” starts while they are in Japan?

martin33

Exactly. Just thinking from a strategic point of view-- you're the CEO, you really need to do something about your 45%-above-market pilot wages, but the union is sitting on an unbreakable contract (you've already tried!) for two years. Moreoever, you are sitting on enough cash, and operations are stable enough, that you're not going to be pushed into liquidity crisis anytime soon.

How do you approach such a problem?

First, why is it such a tough problem-- well, imagine: What could possibly be in DALPA's interest to make such an agreement? Think about it-- by doing NOTHING, not one of their members can be laid off nor lose a dime in salary and benefits until 2005, and DL will in all likelihood live long enough to fulfill that obligation.

From DALPA's point of view, agreeing to concessions at that future time must surely dominate agreeing now, mustn't it? In the meantime, DALPA can pursue the have-cake-and-eat-it-too strategy by appearing diplomatic and agreeing to "consider" management proposals, for say a cool 18 months or so...

If you're Leo and you need lower costs sooner, what should you do? You have no credible threat of bankruptcy in your arsenal until late 2004, and you've pretty much done all you can do to the other nonunion labor groups.

I don't know that there is a right answer, but surely there are wrong answers, such as: jack up your salary+bonus by 150% then take two token salary cuts?

FWAAA

Well, at least give them credit for trying. These two items are a good start:

Last week DL announced something kinda rare for the airline industry these days: it declared a cash dividend.

Couple that with its recently disclosed increases in executive pay (and efforts to pre-fund executive pensions), and I'd say they're off to a good start at diminishing their cash balance.

theDeltaFlyer

Yep, the pilots are over paid for market conditions. Yep, they negotiated a good deal and now have Leo by the b****.

If everyone was in an all-for-one and one-for-all mood they'd take the pay cuts to help DL survive.

Of course, Leo would have funded the pilot retirement program the same way he funded his own to protect everyone's future from the worst (see numerous articles about what hapened at US).

Since he chose not to I can't blame DALPA and the pilots if they give Leo a gesture with one finger in response to his "request".

Perhaps there's some negotiating room here. But it seems cooler heads never prevail until an airline is on the brink ...

------------------
----------------------
Leo showed us his new loyalty program so we showed him ours ...
2003 DL spend = $0
2003 NW spend = $21.4k and increasing

avek00

Non-union DL slaves have yet to take ANY paycuts. Virginia Avenue should demonstrate a true need for pilot cuts by reducing the slaves' wages first, THEN obtaining the difference from DALPA. Otherwise, one cannot be blamed for thinking that VA. Ave. is simply trying to play the freedmen and slaves off of each other, IMHO.

------------------
Thank you for choosing Continental Airlines, a proud member of the SkyTeam Alliance.

[This message has been edited by avek00 (edited 05-01-2003).]

ConnFlyer

False. DL is actively furloughing pilots using force majeur caused by the conflict in Iraq. 142 pilots were furloughed today and another 50 get the axe on June 1. Of course, the conflict is over and the pilots may challenge, but for now DL can still furlough.

DL will also hit BK long before the end of 2004, if current burn rates continue. DL has about 1.9 Billion in cash, but has to maintain at the bare minimum 1.0 Billion. If things haven't improved dramatically, DL would likely seek bankruptcy sometime in Feb/March 2004.

DALPA will also feel some pressure from the 1300+ furloughed pilots. Without a new agreement, DL has no incentive to buy new planes and in turn bring back furloughees. Meanwhile, the pilot pool will naturally shrink as senior pilots retire...this will start to put a real hurt on the dues that DALPA can collect. Granted, DALPA generally doesn't care about its junior most members, but as the furlough's continue to climb higher, DALPA will start to feel pressure.

N866DA

It's always entertaining to hear the die hard union folks use the "freemen" and "slave" analogy.

The noncontract workforce have already taken significant compensation cuts in the form of healthcare and retirement benefit changes. Furthermore, their workrules and productivity are already extremely favorable to the company.

Look at pilot wages in their proper perspective, which is relative to other network majors that have secured pilot concessions and thus set the new standard for pilot wages. It becomes quite clear that Delta's proposal for pilot paycuts is both needed and very favorable to the pilots.

ss278

The sad, disturbing, or ironic (take your pick)thing is, that today a couple of Wall Street types commented that the 25% figure was nowhere near enough.

bdschobel

That's not really fair. Few pilots earn more than the IRC section 401(a)(17) limit of $200,000 (in 2003). Thus, their pensions are already funded -- or guaranteed to a great extent by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (a Federal agency). Leo funded a few executives' non-qualified excess pensions, which would have the status of general obligations in the event of bankruptcy. By funding them, he guaranteed that even the excess pensions would be paid. That was quite extraordinary, but it wouldn't really apply to the vast majority of pilots.

Bruce

avek00

The same can be said for the slaves' wages. While DL employees might be a bit more productive than those of other airlines (no doubt due to fear of the whip), the bottom line is that the payscales of nearly ALL Delta employees are significantly higher than industry average. Hence, it is not unfair to expect all members of the Delta family to take a paycut in order to save the company.

------------------
Thank you for choosing Continental Airlines, a proud member of the SkyTeam Alliance.

FWAAA

While you are much more expert in this area than I - I thought I read that the USAir pilots took a big hit when their pension plan was terminated, and that the PBGC payments would only amount to a fraction of what the pilots had been expecting. Of course, I may very well be mistaken.