FlyZ

I started worrying about replacing mainline jets one-for-one as the 717s come on board. I went to the DALPA site and looked through the FAQs. If you'll bear with me, read through this answer and see if it makes sense:

Q: "What is to keep the Company from simply playing a shell game with the fleet plan by getting rid of other types as fast as the 717s show up or simply not reducing the RJ fleet as they promise?"

A: "All of the provisions in the Section 1 are front loaded toward mainline pilot protections. Small narrow body aircraft (717s) must be in the fleet before 76 seat aircraft are added, and the appropriate number of 50-seat aircraft must then be removed from the DCI fleet in the same year in which 76-seat aircraft are added. Regardless of what the Company does with the mainline fleet, the minimum block hour ratio will require that, if domestic mainline block hours are reduced below a minimum level, DCI block hours will also have to be reduced to remain in compliance with the PWA."

To me, this paragraph from our experts (the ones we are trusting with at least the next three years of our well-being) doesn't even answer the FAQ they presented themselves. The question is, "How is the company prevented from replacing mainline jets with the 717s?" The answer they give is, "Well, they can't add 76-seaters until the 717s are here, and they also have to park 50-seaters. We also have downside protection if we shrink." Have they thought this through all the way?

What if we don't shrink? If I were RA, wanting to move more flying to large comfortable RJs, here's how I would do it, remaining in compliance with this new scope clause:

1) Start bringing 717s on board.
2) Park 50 seaters as planned. This reduces DCI block hours by X%.
3) Now mainline block hours can be reduced by X% as well, still in keeping with the sparkling new block hour ratio. No rush on this...doesn't have to be met until Jul 2014.
4) Reduce mainline block hours by moving X/2% flying from mainline to the new 76-seaters. DCI goes up, mainline goes down, and block hour ratios are still in compliance.
5) Park older 757, MD-88, etc as 717s come on board, keeping mainline flying, block hours, and pilot positions flat.

So there you have it...we are trading lots of brand-new 76-seaters for pay gains that barely track inflation. No new mainline jobs, and plenty of RJs to repeat the slot swap scam in another location (DFW?) Please vote no.

hoserpilot

You have to remember how old Carl is. Way back in the stone age airline pilots flew mail. They navigated by bonfires and the mark one eyeball. Someone got the bright idea to put some passengers on the mailbags. Young Carl's boss bought a bunch of surplus WWI airplanes to cash in on the demand the self loading freight brought. Self loading freight = people.

At this time young Carl had a bad case of WPS. WPS stands for wooden prop syndrome and is similar to shiny jet syndrome that we have today. Carl sold his little sister to some sweat shop for flight lessons. He was soon hired to fly that cool plane with two wings.

Unfortunately those passengers didn't like to travel year round. Poor Carl's first furlough happened in September of 1937. Right after the summer rush. He was so devastated he almost quit flying. Instead he got a job selling Model A Fords at the local dealer. This boom and bust, fly the summer, furlough through the winter cycle lasted five years. By this time Carl accumulated enough time to move on to the big show.......monoplanes!!!!



While I don't know Carl's real story I do know there are many crummy flying jobs out there where the bottom third are furloughed each fall. I'm sure hard work along with a little luck has gotten him where he is today. Enjoy the 747 and retire when your ready Carl. In the meantime, does anyone have Tanya Hardings number? I'm sure she could use a few bucks wacking our senior pilots ankles. She could help with our career stagnation problem! Hahaha

Waves

I probably would be “there” except for my dire outlook on the economy and world events. I just watched a video saying there is a chance that a barrel of oil may go to $220 in 2012. I'm not convinced of that per se, but what effect do you suppose that would have regarding our negotiating leverage? The next jobs report is supposed to be bleak again. Housing crisis is far from over. 15 global banks just got downgraded. Millions of Americans out of work. Unemployment still at 8.2%. Stockton, CA just declared BK. National debt approaching $16T and expected to be over $30T by the end of the decade. Iran getting the bomb. Greece failing. Spain failing. Italy failing. Euro going down if not away completely. US borrowing from China 40 cents on every US dollar it squanders. Blah, Blah, Blah. Yeah I know, it’s a broken record, but IMHO these events are not only unprecedented, they cannot be ignored. To do so is foolish and reckless. The company is finally making money after a decade of bleeding red ink. You can let your own chips ride, but I would rather take my chips and go home. For now anyway. Sorry about the added 76 seaters. Your welcome for the 88 717’s.

texavia

I'm pretty sure that is Carl's real story.

Waves

@FlyZ: Maybe I’m missing your shell game theory, but doesn’t this statement cover it? “Regardless of what the Company does with the mainline fleet, the minimum block hour ratio will require that, if domestic mainline block hours are reduced below a minimum level, DCI block hours will also have to be reduced to remain in compliance with the PWA." Remember, it is and always will be the company’s call on how many mainline aircraft and block hours we fly. If they want to shrink mainline, there isn’t much we can do about it. If their intent is to shrink mainline, then they will certainly do so with or without this TA. Turning it down will not prevent them from parking older 757’s, 767’s, MD-88’s, and A-319’s and reducing our block hours.

Boomer

Oil at $220 parks the 50s (and half of DCI) immediately. Scope problem solved.

As for the rest of the economic meltdown hypothetical, I agree that would be a tough landscape on which to negotiate. But in that case, wouldn't Delta be coming to the pilots for relief no matter what contract is in place at the time?

DLpilot

They have been replaying that oil video for that past 4 years. They have no idea what it will do. Incidentally, if oil was to go that high then this TA will not save us either. Not getting a raise would be the last of my concern at that point.

Waves

Like I said, I'm not convinced of $220 a barrel, but we've already seen $149. Wouldn't be too difficult to envision that again. And yes, the company would really have no choice but to come back and ask us for relief if that were to occur. All I'm saying here is since I think the economy and world are in the toilet, I would rather take the bird in hand. Feel absolutely free to let your chips ride. It's not hurting my feelings one bit.

scambo1

In the AF, I was a Gazinia brother and had a squadron full of similarly immature brothers:

Roscoe, Tip, Pud, Dick, etc.

You're bet sounds like we're getting a divorce...I don't like the concept of finding a woman I hate and then buying her a house.

Finis;

With you I'm a-ok with agreeing to disagree.

scambo1

Oh, at no point did I say that the conflict of interest within ALPA would not be tested - if our bargaining agent was truly bargaining just for us.