acl65pilot

eh?

The Lion's share of the DC 9 replacements pre merger were in the from of CRJ900's and E175's at CPS. Post merger it was CRJ-900's E170's and CRJ-700's.

Where were we 70+ seat aircraft wise at SOC? Where are we now? Where are we going?

Yes, we have MD-90's and they are stating they are replacing them, but look at their routes. Some like MSP-MSN and MSP-MKE are old 9 routes but many are 320 routes. I would not call that a direct replacement. The lower gauge jets we currently see off property are doing that work.

The 717 will replace a lot of the stuff the DCI operators are doing with less frequency and less seats to a given market. The DCI lift will replace 50 seat lift. It, like C2K will be a variance to the top side of the trend line unless we truly figure out, and employ a path and plan to sunset DCI. This is not it.

I recall you plan, and it is one I agreed with. We could have easily done that here. There are no duration limits on the new 76 seat aircraft lift. That should have been a no brainer.

I also want to know what happened to the talking points about the 50's being uneconomical, we don't need to worry about them, they are self limiting that Slow was throwing our way up to a few months ago.

Is the answer: "They are but we are merely helping?"

Are we "really" helping the overall DCI quagmire, or giving it new life but in a smaller foot print?

acl65pilot

I was told that, but I swore we were discussing this about six month ago and some were stating that we did not, and it was not possible.

forgot to bid

I'd still like to see the average hours flown by reserves right now. If it's 40 hours below 60, then if the work rules can change to get that number up to 60 then per paper napkin math you could cut 700 pilots out.

Not saying that'd work. But if 20% of this airline was on reserve then that's 2,100 pilots. Flying 40 hours a month that's 84,000 hours.

If 84,000 hours is the pot of reserve flying to be had, divide it by 60 hours per pilot and you get 1,400 pilots needed.

Again, not saying that's the plan. Saying if we're below the 60 hour benchmark then I wonder what happens if the work rules gets us there.

I'm a firm believe we've been presented a TA that, when it comes to work rules and outsourcing, will mitigate the need to hire and train as the rumored retirement boom commences.

F-14 short call:

Dare I say more?

Bluto

You're probably right about where they'll fly. The ratios effectively guarantee that we will regain some of the flying lost to the regionals. That's nice. But at the cost of our only leverage? Once the genie is out of the bottle, those 76-seaters are very likely not going away for a long time.

And lest we consider these 717's 'growth aircraft' ACL and some others have pointed out that all 88 of these arriving will bring our fleet back to where it was at SOC. I don't consider that growth.

The 50-seaters are an anchor around this company's neck. If they so badly need our help to remove it, why are they low-balling us? Something doesn't add up. It sounds like high-pressure sales techniques and I don't respond well to those.

I understand why the ratios focus on domestic. And I know the TA provides some improvements over our current JV language and the AS deal.

Now, please explain what leverage you think we'll have for our next negotiation after we give the company 70 new large RJ's? If we, as a union, have no clout to negotiate aside from circumstance, why give away our only piece of leverage?

shiznit

Restricting the footprint is critical, and we have no protections for that right now.

Once we have put a fence around the DCI pen, we can shrink the pen as the numbers naturally dwindle (if we choose to, and I think most on here do).

I see it as step one in a multi-step game. Shorter contracts allow us to take another "step" in shorter time frames. Waiting for 7 years in between negotiations doesn't help us achieve improvements nearly as often.

Also in 3-6 years there will yet again be some turnover in the LEC's that will put more ex-RJ/currently junior guys in elected roles who see the importance of continuing to improve that area.

I'm less than enamored with other areas of the TA, but scope doesn't bother me. I think the other part of our conversation will start to happen in 2015 if we go with this and go into another round in 2015, but you normally get a massive rejection if you ask for too much all at once (think of it like making out with the girls when you were in high school).

Kilroy

I think this TA is going to work out great. Regardless of what is being said on the negative side this TA will pass hands down. As I previously posted, I do believe that all flying will be done by Delta pilots, once Delta management brings on the regional pilots. The guys that keep saying no more outsourcing, bring all flying back to mainline etc......are only thinking about upgrading, better QOL etc....however, you all fail to understand that if my statement does in fact come true, which it looks like it just might, this will do nothing for you personally in the short term. At least for 5 or more years. For those at the regional who keep saying take your flying back, be careful for what you ask for. If I am wrong and Delta does take their flying back without bring the regional pilots with it, that does not guarantee you a job at big D. If you don't make the cut in the interview, which many from the regionals have not, then what are you going to do then?

johnso29

Wow. Oil has been tanking lately. Even Brent Crude is under $100.

Maybe it's a conspiracy by RA to make 50 seaters profitable again.

Check Essential

Did these men get it right?

Lee Moak
Tim O'Malley
Parri Olmstead
Mike Pinho
Rick Dominguez
Roger White
Rich Harwood
Ken Rogers

Let's not kid ourselves. I undoubtedly left a few names off the list but these are the men who wrote this contract. With stunning speed, the whole intricate (and time consuming) "process" was circumvented.

When we cast our vote the question we need to answer is do we trust the judgment of the handful of people who brought us this contract? This is not the contract the pilots wanted and it is not the contract the MEC wanted.
This was done by a very small group of people who decided what they thought was best for Delta Air Lines and the Delta pilots. They largely disregarded the survey, excluded the elected reps and cut a deal. They then used the powerful machinery at their disposal to get it out to membership ratification. The information and communication resources they control are formidable. They overwhelmed our MEC reps with National's lawyers, economists, political types warning about our chances at the NMB, etc. etc. They are doing the same with the pilot group as a whole.

Make no mistake. These are smart guys. Big picture guys. They've been in power a long time. They are not management but they clearly view themselves as managers of the pilot group. They are pilot advocates and they want everything they can get for the pilots but they also see themselves as responsible for the corporation's health. They believe deeply in the philosophy of labor participation in "corporate governance". They place great value on a pilot member of the board of directors. etc. etc.

I haven't seen the survey but it seems obvious that in many areas these people substituted their judgment for the collective wishes of the pilot group and our elected reps.

On the other hand, "Time value of money" is not just a slogan or cliche. It is real. The dysfunctional, anti-labor NMB is also real. These men made a strategic decision to make an end run around the long, torturous, drawn out NMB negotiation and mediation system that has undeniably been broken for the last decade. That may have been a stroke of brilliance and the best thing that ever happened or it may have cost us hundreds of millions. Would the Railway Labor Act have worked for us or slowly smothered us? That's the decision we have to make. Will we really do better by taking that long road?

It's done. Fait accompli. We have a TA. We are going to vote.
We need to decide -- did these men get it right?

CVG767A

Average reserve at Delta flies 45hrs/month, according to DALPA

MrBojangles

I've worked at another airline (one where you got extended every single trip and used basically up to the max limit every month) and I have a problem with this TA's reserve section too. It opens us up to being used like I was at my last airline-which will happen if we run on thin staffing. I know we haven't been used like that in the past or now-but do you want to gamble on that continuing? I don't like the odds-obviously management wants to reduce staffing significantly.