Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-28-2012, 07:31 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Heyas,
Someone did the math on the webboard.
With the 717s, the DCI to mainline ratio is 1.72.
Without the 717s, it's 1.53.
Management gets the airplanes, pumps up the permitted ratio, and returns the airplanes when the leases expire, and we're left with the same mainline fleet we have now.
And 70 more large RJs.
Yikes.
Nu
Someone did the math on the webboard.
With the 717s, the DCI to mainline ratio is 1.72.
Without the 717s, it's 1.53.
Management gets the airplanes, pumps up the permitted ratio, and returns the airplanes when the leases expire, and we're left with the same mainline fleet we have now.
And 70 more large RJs.
Yikes.
Nu
A fair question IS however, whet is the current block hour ratio? I would like to know THAT.
05-28-2012, 07:35 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Demanding our company "execute its plan" is indeed our only enforcement mechanism. Our entire downside "protection" rests on whether an arbitrator would find FOR us and force Delta to remove it's code share from the offending airline.
Somebody will have to educate me on how Independence Air applies here?
Carl
Somebody will have to educate me on how Independence Air applies here?
Carl
You're losing it Carl...
05-28-2012, 07:36 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
05-28-2012, 07:38 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
Carl,
I really don't want to get into the middle of this but I have a question/point with regards to the above.
It sounds like you are saying we (ALPA) cannot influence RJ operators directly into lowering their block hours to remain with the ratio if mainline reduces flying. This may be techically true but........
As signatores of a contract with Delta Air Lines, we DO have influence with them. Here is my question: If the block hour ratio went out of balance, we grieved and won, wouldn't/couldn't Delta be forced to remove it's code from a DCI carrier to get back in the ratio balance (ala Independence Air) if the DCI carriers refused to lower their block hours?
In retrospect, this is also a question for Slowplay...
Hope I'm not stirring the hornet's nest here.
Denny
I really don't want to get into the middle of this but I have a question/point with regards to the above.
It sounds like you are saying we (ALPA) cannot influence RJ operators directly into lowering their block hours to remain with the ratio if mainline reduces flying. This may be techically true but........
As signatores of a contract with Delta Air Lines, we DO have influence with them. Here is my question: If the block hour ratio went out of balance, we grieved and won, wouldn't/couldn't Delta be forced to remove it's code from a DCI carrier to get back in the ratio balance (ala Independence Air) if the DCI carriers refused to lower their block hours?
In retrospect, this is also a question for Slowplay...
Hope I'm not stirring the hornet's nest here.
Denny
05-28-2012, 07:39 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
05-28-2012, 07:50 AM
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Perhaps what you mean to say is that Delta would find itself locked in to a contract for services which it could not fully utilize, costing it a lot of money when it could ill afford the expense. If things became dire enough, there might be agreement between management and ALPA to reset the percentages to avoid bankruptcy of their employer. That is what happened to C2K.
Carl
05-28-2012, 07:58 AM
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
No.. the grievance process and the courts of law are our enforcement mechanism You above all should LOVE that. Wasn't some kind of perverted badge of honor with fNWA about how many grievances they had outstanding? But do you think management can just ignore the contract with no ramifications? If that is the case, why have a contract at all?
You're losing it Carl...
You're losing it Carl...
I don't know what you think you gain by using terms like "perverted badge of honor" when you discuss fNWA. It's so incredibly unprofessional and debasing.
Carl
05-28-2012, 08:01 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Position: Nice while it lasted
Posts: 326
This TA says the 76 seaters can come aboard when the company "...establishes a fleet..." What is the LEGAL definition of "establish"? I don't know (not a lawyer), but here' one I plucked from a regular dictionary: "set up (an organization, system, or set of rules) on a firm or permanent basis".
SET UP on a permanent basis. Not take delivery, not have on property, not operating. Setting up. So here's what I think this TA allows the company to do: announce the leasing of all 88 717s, thus "setting up" a new mainline fleet size. Then announce a buy order for every one of those 76 seaters, now allowed by the newly "established" mainline fleet size. All this to be followed by the parking plan for the -9s and (my guess) additional older aircraft the company doesn't want to keep but haven't told us yet. Does anyone really think the company wants to expand its narrowbody fleet some 70 airframes?
Once those 76ers are on order, they're here to stay. Rationalizing the RJ fleet size under the ratios won't come until sometime in 2014; our orders start trickling in in 2013. I personally don't believe this TA will trigger the left seat opportunities that some have touted. In fact, in terms of upgrade, I don't think it is a nail in the coffin - I think it is 70 nails in the coffin.
I don't trust the company to do right by us. This TA shows how little they value our contributions, and ALPA certainly seems OK with that notion. I have no idea if my scenario will come to fruition, but I hope no one is surprised if it does. One word - establish - appears to throw that door wide open.
05-28-2012, 08:02 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: Kickin’ Back
Posts: 6,971
Come on in Denny, the water's warm!
Have to check with my pinky toe first!!!
No, we (ALPA) could definitely attempt to influence them. But they would be under no legal obligation to succumb to our influence because they don't sign our contract. Until they do, compliance is voluntary on their part. The language itself doesn't even say "...then the RJ airlines SHALL pull down their block hours...", it says: 'Delta will execute its plan to bring RJ block hours in compliance with the ratios..." Why is it written that way? Because we can only force our company to do something because it is our company who signs our contract. But does the RJ airline have to act on our company's plan? Absolutely not.
Agree!
Not unless that contract legally binds said RJ airline to our pilot contract. If such a signed document exists, it is imperative to see that document before we vote on this TA.
I think you misunderstood my use of the word "them." (And I can see why, I was not clear.) By them, I meant Delta Air Lines. Our influence is 100% with Delta Air Lines management via our contract.
Delta being forced to remove it's code share from the offending DCI is a possible outcome from an arbitrator. The arbitrator could also find that the RLA does not allow for the contract of one airline to remove jobs that BELONG to another airline.
Well, since one never knows 100% how a arbitrator will decide, I will say that is a possibility. But..........alot of decisions like this are based on past precedent and I have to go no further than Independence Air to cite a similar example. With IA we did force Delta to remove it's code and cost IA jobs. I know the circumstances are not exactly the same but they are similar and IA went out of business not the least reason because we held fast to our scope clause.....(Poor english there, will have to get my para-legal to clean it up!!
)
This is soooo cool.
Getting to vote on this TA...Cost Neutral
Getting to have a legal discussion with DennyCrane...Priceless
I never knew the groundskeeper was such a deep thinker! Go figure!
Carl
Have to check with my pinky toe first!!!
No, we (ALPA) could definitely attempt to influence them. But they would be under no legal obligation to succumb to our influence because they don't sign our contract. Until they do, compliance is voluntary on their part. The language itself doesn't even say "...then the RJ airlines SHALL pull down their block hours...", it says: 'Delta will execute its plan to bring RJ block hours in compliance with the ratios..." Why is it written that way? Because we can only force our company to do something because it is our company who signs our contract. But does the RJ airline have to act on our company's plan? Absolutely not.
Agree!
Not unless that contract legally binds said RJ airline to our pilot contract. If such a signed document exists, it is imperative to see that document before we vote on this TA.
I think you misunderstood my use of the word "them." (And I can see why, I was not clear.) By them, I meant Delta Air Lines. Our influence is 100% with Delta Air Lines management via our contract.
Delta being forced to remove it's code share from the offending DCI is a possible outcome from an arbitrator. The arbitrator could also find that the RLA does not allow for the contract of one airline to remove jobs that BELONG to another airline.
Well, since one never knows 100% how a arbitrator will decide, I will say that is a possibility. But..........alot of decisions like this are based on past precedent and I have to go no further than Independence Air to cite a similar example. With IA we did force Delta to remove it's code and cost IA jobs. I know the circumstances are not exactly the same but they are similar and IA went out of business not the least reason because we held fast to our scope clause.....(Poor english there, will have to get my para-legal to clean it up!!
)This is soooo cool.
Getting to vote on this TA...Cost Neutral
Getting to have a legal discussion with DennyCrane...Priceless
I never knew the groundskeeper was such a deep thinker! Go figure!
Carl
Denny
05-28-2012, 08:03 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
But for the DAL flights, Delta does the scheduling exclusively.
It gets funny during IROPS. When Delta got so busy with their own mess the DCI carriers would implode. Comair managed to have their whole airline time out a couple of times as did ASA. During critical IROPS crews were known to get "lost" for as long as two weeks. Of course this happened most frequently in the middle of winter when the DCI crew was someplace nice, like Mexico, with limited, or no, communications ability. You got to enjoy conversations like "Where are you?" "Do you have an airplane?" "Why didn't you call us for two weeks?" (eh' you sent out a memo not to call in during IROPS, we were just following Company guidance."
Of course then they would deadhead you home (why?) and back in the good old days the next crew would find major components of the airplane had been stolen while it sat on the ramp. There was a ACA J41 which got stripped so badly it never flew again. People strongly suspected an on field shop had used the airplane for "spares."
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 05-28-2012 at 08:23 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
