Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Closed Thread Subscribe

Page 1062 of 20173

1062

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

07-19-2009, 12:49 PM

#10611

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: 747-400 Captain

Posts: 12,487

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare

It is of course Carl.. a matter of perspective. What the NWA guys are going to benefit from is the economic downturn.

Hardly. The displacements to come from our new management team's decision to park DAL-N airplanes will be from DAL-N pilots. Don't see how displacements benefit DAL-N pilots.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare

Blockhead didn't alloow for that now did he?

He specifically allowed for that. If he had agreed to our Date of Hire proposal, than you might be right. He didn't. Instead, he aligned us by pay and aircraft type.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare

After we have all been bumped out of our seats in a few weeks... when the economy turns back up... MY current seat will be filled by DC9 and A320 guys... the same guys that cannot now hold anything even resembling a widebody aircraft.

You don't know that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare

(And yes... the 767 is a widebody)

Never said it wasn't

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare

So who lost (or will lose) is all a matter of perspective, isn't it?

It's really not. It's fact. The DAL-S proposal was chosen by the arbitrators. The DAL-N propasal was not. You can view the consequences of the SLI from your own perspective - we all do that. But you cannot view the SLI result any other way except one side won, and the other side lost. Unless you're one of these new age teachers who tell their little math students that there are no wrong answers, and no winners or losers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare

But I'll make you a deal. I won't talk about this anymore if you won't.

I don't mind talking about it. The facts are what they are.

Carl

07-19-2009, 12:51 PM

#10612

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: 747-400 Captain

Posts: 12,487

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reroute

As was yours....which also doesn't matter.

I didn't offer opinion. I offered fact. The DAL-S proposal was accepted by the arbitrators, the DAL-N proposal was not.

That certainly did and does matter.

Carl

07-19-2009, 12:57 PM

#10613

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: 747-400 Captain

Posts: 12,487

Quote:

Originally Posted by wiggy

Carl, I'm glad you agree the SLI was fair, we agree on that! Somehow, though, it's a little nostalgic thinking about all the little "battles" we all had over the SLI last year......in a sick way, I suppose, it was kinda fun...them was sorta the "good 'ole days"...wasn't they? I think when we are truly combined, we are going to make a great airline!

Yes...those were the days. I appreciate the mature level of debate we had over such an emotional issue. I even appreciate the maturity of all those other poopie-heads that disagree with me.

Carl

Quote:

Originally Posted by wiggy

(paraphrasing Vito Corleone: "I'm going to blame some of the people in this room for this...")

"...and THIS - I will not forgive."

Carl

07-19-2009, 12:58 PM

#10614

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: 747-400 Captain

Posts: 12,487

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sink r8

I find it interesting that certain viewpoints or discussions, which could in theory start food-fights, are met here with reasoned and measured responses (from both sides), that serve to steer things back to the center.

That tells me there is hope for this merger.

Imagine an East guy telling a (UsAirways) West guy that he "won" SLI. Imagine the response...

Three words - Rear Naked Choke!

Carl

07-19-2009, 01:15 PM

#10615

Reroute

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: May 2007

Posts: 593

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

I didn't offer opinion. I offered fact. The DAL-S proposal was accepted by the arbitrators, the DAL-N proposal was not.

That certainly did and does matter.

Carl

Neither proposal was accepted by the arbitrators. The arbitrators award did resemble the DALPA proposal, but it was not the DALPA proposal. DALPA's proposal had more categories, DC-9 captains integrated with international widebodied first officers and no credit for future attrition.

07-19-2009, 01:18 PM

#10616

RockyBoy

Doesn't Get Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jun 2007

Posts: 2,598

Quote:

Originally Posted by sailingfun

The multiplier determines the number of reserves required or the number you see in the computer. Once that number is posted it has no effect on the actual swaps. Yes it has a effect overall because it ups the reserves required however if the day shows adequate coverage you will get your drop or swap.

I was told otherwise by a scheduling supervisor when I was denied a swap. I then read section 23 and it explains it the same way the supervisor did. The min levels are determined based on averages over the last 12 months and block hours, then the multipler is used to determine if the swap will be made. You actually have to run the formula yourself based on the numbers in the computer to see if the trade will go through. If that is incorrect, then scheduling is doing it the wrong way and I have been denied a number of trips that shoulnd't have been denied.

07-19-2009, 02:08 PM

#10617

tsquare

No longer cares

Joined APC: Mar 2008

Position: 767er Captain

Posts: 12,109

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

Hardly. The displacements to come from our new management team's decision to park DAL-N airplanes will be from DAL-N pilots. Don't see how displacements benefit DAL-N pilots.

He specifically allowed for that. If he had agreed to our Date of Hire proposal, than you might be right. He didn't. Instead, he aligned us by pay and aircraft type.

You don't know that.

Never said it wasn't

It's really not. It's fact. The DAL-S proposal was chosen by the arbitrators. The DAL-N propasal was not. You can view the consequences of the SLI from your own perspective - we all do that. But you cannot view the SLI result any other way except one side won, and the other side lost. Unless you're one of these new age teachers who tell their little math students that there are no wrong answers, and no winners or losers.

I don't mind talking about it. The facts are what they are.

Carl

Carl... I love ya brother... but you and I will have to agree to disagree. Let's leave it at that.

07-19-2009, 03:33 PM

#10618

Bucking Bar

Can't abide NAI

Joined APC: Jun 2007

Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler

Posts: 12,037

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

Hardly. The displacements to come from our new management team's decision to park DAL-N airplanes will be from DAL-N pilots. Don't see how displacements benefit DAL-N pilots.

Carl

Carl, using that logic every new airplane purchased by this combined company going forward is bought by "our new management team" not DAL-N. Right?

Oh, well I didn't think so either.

07-19-2009, 04:31 PM

#10619

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: 747-400 Captain

Posts: 12,487

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar

Carl, using that logic every new airplane purchased by this combined company going forward is bought by "our new management team" not DAL-N. Right?

What am I missing here? That's not logic, that's exactly the case. Every new airplane purchased by the combined company going forward is done by the new management team, not DAL-N management. Unfortunately, the new management team is making some dreadful decisions regarding parking aircraft IMO. There were years when our freight division made most of the company's profits - when other airlines were losing their back sides. Now our new management team has decided to walk away from that division and those Pacific routes.

Are you saying that aircraft purchases going forward ARE being made by DAL-N management?

Carl

07-19-2009, 05:42 PM

#10620

Scoop

Moderator

Joined APC: Dec 2007

Position: DAL 330

Posts: 6,991

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

What am I missing here? That's not logic, that's exactly the case. Every new airplane purchased by the combined company going forward is done by the new management team, not DAL-N management. Unfortunately, the new management team is making some dreadful decisions regarding parking aircraft IMO. There were years when our freight division made most of the company's profits - when other airlines were losing their back sides. Now our new management team has decided to walk away from that division and those Pacific routes.

Are you saying that aircraft purchases going forward ARE being made by DAL-N management?

Carl

Carl,
Get used to it. I have been at DAL for 10 years and this is managements legacy:

* Stock Buybacks - Billions ( might only be hundreds of millions) lost as stock goes to zero in BK.

* COMAIR & ASA purchase - Buy high sell low - Major $ lost on ASA. Who knows what will happen with COMAIR.

* Fuel hedges - Hundreds of million lost - still working on that magical Billion dollar number.

* Boston terminal upgrades - Your guess is as good as mine.

I know there are others that I can not remember. You would think the law of averages would require management to sooner or later be on the right side of a decision, well I am still waiting.

Scoop