Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-24-2012, 09:38 PM
Line Holder
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: DAL 7ER FO
Posts: 98
Unfortunately, life and this TA aren't that black and white. Anyone who actually understands what's in section 1 of this TA would not say that. There is plenty not to like in this TA but section 1 is not one of them.
05-24-2012, 09:53 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Urban chicken rancher.
Posts: 6,070
All this back & forth reminded me of a quote:
---------------
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
John Stuart Mill
English economist & philosopher (1806 - 1873)
---------------
Air Force Academy guys had to memorize this as part of their freshman year.
---------------
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
John Stuart Mill
English economist & philosopher (1806 - 1873)
---------------
Air Force Academy guys had to memorize this as part of their freshman year.
05-24-2012, 10:54 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
In essence, we're going to order 70 new jets that the company can use to replace us in exchange for parking 200+ jets the company won't replace us with.
Another way to look at it, if the CRJ-200 killed the 100 seater, what can a CRJ-900 kill?
Now you may say the CRJ-200 didn't kill the 100 seater, we are getting 717s. But only because SWA is dumping them, it's a unique situation and... what if the 717s are here to kill the 88?
And there is no guarantee the parked CRJ-200 routes will be covered by the large RJs, they may not necessarily backfill their routes either if high frequency is no longer en vogue as it doesn't meet the capacity discipline maximize PRASM mantra.
Last edited by forgot to bid; 05-24-2012 at 11:29 PM.
05-24-2012, 11:06 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Okay, so we're ordering 100 739s and getting 88 717s.
If this TA passed, we could probably up that 739 order to 180 739s. Use them, the 90s and the 717s to replace all of the 319s, all of the 88s, half the 320s, 2 dozen 757s, all of the 763s.
The end result would be a net increase of 9 mainline jets (that may not even require hiring given the reserve rule changes), a 2% increase in the number of mainline block hours, 1% decrease in ASMs and still meet the 1.56 ratio with DCI knocked down to 450 aircraft.
Unless i'm missing something we could grow to shrink.
To me there's a real possibility we're giving up scope for no real gain... at least for us.
Ya'll have a good night, hopefully won't see you til Saturday night. Because it'll take all day saturday to catch up.
If this TA passed, we could probably up that 739 order to 180 739s. Use them, the 90s and the 717s to replace all of the 319s, all of the 88s, half the 320s, 2 dozen 757s, all of the 763s.
The end result would be a net increase of 9 mainline jets (that may not even require hiring given the reserve rule changes), a 2% increase in the number of mainline block hours, 1% decrease in ASMs and still meet the 1.56 ratio with DCI knocked down to 450 aircraft.
Unless i'm missing something we could grow to shrink.
To me there's a real possibility we're giving up scope for no real gain... at least for us.
Ya'll have a good night, hopefully won't see you til Saturday night. Because it'll take all day saturday to catch up.
05-24-2012, 11:26 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Last parting shot, cannot resist. 
Taking 600 RJs down to 450 but with the seat miles of 550, is not a win. Its a slight of hand.
Especially if the network plan going forward only requires 125 50-seaters but demands many more 76-seaters, like say 70 now and maybe more in 2016? All we're doing is facilitating the plan at our expense.
And this is especially not a win if by the time the shinny newish 717 carrots and the really new 739s get here they've been slated to be pure replacement jets.
But do not get me wrong, if network needs or wants large regional jets, by all means have as many as you want and order them as fast as they can be delivered. I just won't vote for a contract that gives up scope to do that.
Taking 600 RJs down to 450 but with the seat miles of 550, is not a win. Its a slight of hand.
Especially if the network plan going forward only requires 125 50-seaters but demands many more 76-seaters, like say 70 now and maybe more in 2016? All we're doing is facilitating the plan at our expense.
And this is especially not a win if by the time the shinny newish 717 carrots and the really new 739s get here they've been slated to be pure replacement jets.
But do not get me wrong, if network needs or wants large regional jets, by all means have as many as you want and order them as fast as they can be delivered. I just won't vote for a contract that gives up scope to do that.
Last edited by forgot to bid; 05-25-2012 at 12:00 AM.
05-24-2012, 11:57 PM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
05-24-2012, 11:59 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: 737n/FO
Posts: 667
I see what you're getting at. Section 1.D.9.b covers the ratio of MBH to DBH. The ratio begins when the first 76-Seat Aircraft is "Engaged" in Delta flying.
I guess I wasn't clear, but the ratio is re-figured every 10 deliveries, with the ratio favoring mainline higher and higher as the 76 seaters and 717's come on, and the 50 seaters are parked. The ratio calculation is different than compliance monitoring which is covered in this section:
1.D.9.c says that compliance will "be measured for the first time on July 1, 2014 and then measured again each succeeding July 1 thereafter, in each instance for the preceeding 12 months on a weighted basis [emphasis mine.]"
The way I read it, and that it was explained in the lounge the other day, is that the bolded part above prevents the loophole that you were suggesting. Thanks for engaging in the conversation though. You made me go re-read that section, which is a good thing!
I guess I wasn't clear, but the ratio is re-figured every 10 deliveries, with the ratio favoring mainline higher and higher as the 76 seaters and 717's come on, and the 50 seaters are parked. The ratio calculation is different than compliance monitoring which is covered in this section:
1.D.9.c says that compliance will "be measured for the first time on July 1, 2014 and then measured again each succeeding July 1 thereafter, in each instance for the preceeding 12 months on a weighted basis [emphasis mine.]"
The way I read it, and that it was explained in the lounge the other day, is that the bolded part above prevents the loophole that you were suggesting. Thanks for engaging in the conversation though. You made me go re-read that section, which is a good thing!
05-25-2012, 12:01 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
And having a hard ratio to protect us is about as valuable as having a hard cap of 255 large regional jets.
05-25-2012, 12:01 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
FTB,
You just hit the nail, once these aircraft are here, they are here to stay, remember that their number will NOT be reduced. That one sentence led me to vote NO on our previous agreements, and I think that statement will come back to haunt us with this agreement. I do think once they are here MGT will be back for block hour restriction relief after just a short time.
Keep these jets off property unless WE are at the controls!
Maybe we could get our point across if all the NO voters put their ballots in on the first day the polls open. I have read the agreement and in no way can I vote for this, as DAL has become my hobby job, it quit being a career long ago.
You just hit the nail, once these aircraft are here, they are here to stay, remember that their number will NOT be reduced. That one sentence led me to vote NO on our previous agreements, and I think that statement will come back to haunt us with this agreement. I do think once they are here MGT will be back for block hour restriction relief after just a short time.
Keep these jets off property unless WE are at the controls!
Maybe we could get our point across if all the NO voters put their ballots in on the first day the polls open. I have read the agreement and in no way can I vote for this, as DAL has become my hobby job, it quit being a career long ago.
If you are junior, you are saying no to your captain's seat for a while longer. I don't care how you vote, I already have mine. It's up to you.
No scare tactics... no spin. I read the agreement. It is a home run. I see a lot of target fixation on this board, and it is causing a LOT of myopia that leads to glaucoma which leads to blindness. The really sad thing is, it is preventable... Educate yourselves rather than firing before you aim.
05-25-2012, 12:08 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
