Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > Delta
Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? >

Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Search

Notices

Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-02-2012, 03:26 AM
  #114291  
Runs with scissors
 
Timbo's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,728
Default

Originally Posted by nerd2009
Where can I view this video?
Log into DL Net, go to the header bar, about the third square to the right you'll get a drop down box, click on Delta Tube. When that window opens, you'll see many company safety videos. Look for the one that says "New Safety Video" or such.

You missed the FLY button scene, but it was right at the very end, after the Capt. says his, "Sit Back, Relax and Enjoy..."
Timbo is offline  
Old 11-02-2012, 03:39 AM
  #114292  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,410
Default

Originally Posted by RetiredFTS
I just returned off long term mil leave and I'm able to participate in this AE but I have a few questions: Are the AE preferences processed before the VDs? Would it be smart to put the same category/base as my AE preference and my VD? Just a little confused with how the surpluses and vacancies are related.
Thanks.
Call 1 800 USA ALPA. Ask to speak with contract admin or post this question in the contract portion of the ALPA we board. They will give you accurate answers and should send you a contract awareness bulletin on how to bid.
sailingfun is offline  
Old 11-02-2012, 03:52 AM
  #114293  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Position: retired 767(dl)
Posts: 5,731
Default

Okay,okay, I get it. There is no"FLY"button. Uhh... is the "UP" switch still installed? It used to next to the "BUMPS" button.
badflaps is offline  
Old 11-02-2012, 04:11 AM
  #114294  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Launchpad475's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2010
Position: SEA7ERB
Posts: 177
Default

Originally Posted by GBU-24
I commute on this route and have often wondered if this was going to happen in the light of AK's continued expansion. I'm actually very surprised DAL is allowing this to happen...seeing we are best buddies! kiss kiss...
So do I... My guess is that we will lose 2 flights, and 2 bookable jumpseats.
Launchpad475 is offline  
Old 11-02-2012, 04:14 AM
  #114295  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: DAL FO
Posts: 2,165
Default

Originally Posted by GBU-24
Spot on. If we draw down this route it will prove again the direction and intentions of our management. Our new contract keeps getting better and better. What's next?
Nothing in this contract or the last prevents any other airline from flying any route they please. What the new contract does that the last one did not is tighten the amount of DL coded pax that can be put on AK metal. I agree with you, the new contract is better.

Are you saying you want to go back to the last contract an allow more DL pax on Alaska?
LeineLodge is offline  
Old 11-02-2012, 04:30 AM
  #114296  
veut gagner à la loterie
 
forgot to bid's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Default

Originally Posted by Boomer
"Hey, come back here" says the MD-88

"Thanks for the treat, stupid"
ha!

there will come a day when the 88 gives a...
forgot to bid is offline  
Old 11-02-2012, 04:35 AM
  #114297  
Runs with scissors
 
Timbo's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,728
Default

Originally Posted by forgot to bid
ha!

there will come a day when the 88 gives a...
Only sissie airplanes (and pilots) need two engines after V1 anyway...

Mad Doggy don't need no stinkin' n'utha motor!
Timbo is offline  
Old 11-02-2012, 04:58 AM
  #114298  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,410
Default

Originally Posted by Launchpad475
So do I... My guess is that we will lose 2 flights, and 2 bookable jumpseats.
Alaska has no nonstop service on that route and can't book their passengers on our flights. The only surprising thig is they have not offered service sooner on that route. We are not code sharing with them on the route however it may be a AMR code share for Alaska.
sailingfun is offline  
Old 11-02-2012, 05:49 AM
  #114299  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,619
Default

Originally Posted by GBU-24
Spot on. If we draw down this route it will prove again the direction and intentions of our management. Our new contract keeps getting better and better. What's next?
Well before we get into another thrash about Alaska, let's remember one thing. Neither Delta nor Alaska have any control about where each other flies. Our contract does not have any restrictions on where Alaska flies. Can you imagine the outrage at Delta if the Alaska pilots tried to negotiate restrictions on which markets Delta could serve?

What we do have in our contract is restriction on where Delta can place their code. In this case Delta is allowed to place our code on Alaska flights with restrictions. These include:

  1. Limits on the number and/or percentage of seats on any market that can have Delta code
  2. A 4 to 1 hub to hub ratio, meaning for every 1 flight that Alaska has Delta code on between Seattle and a Delta hub, Delta has to have 4 flights with Alaska code on in the same market
  3. This is a pro-rate code share. That means that you share the revenue based on how far the passenger traveled on YOUR METAL


Go back and read #3 again. If someone tries to tell you that Delta can make money on Alaska coded flights without them traveling on a Delta airplane, they are flat out wrong. Delta cannot just sell tickets on Alaska flights and make money. A pro rate is based on miles flown, if you fly 0 miles your share of the revenue is $0. Every time you think that Delta is outsourcing flying to Alaska, just remember this, 0 miles = $0.


So Alaska can add a flight from SLC to SEA, they can add 100 and Delta has no say about it. If Delta places code on ONE Alaska flight, then there must be FOUR Delta flights with Alaska code. Delta cannot replace SLC-SEA with Alaska flights, Delta has to grow on a four to one ratio.


The average amount of passengers that are in any one market on Alaska flights is 9. Does anyone have any idea on which Delta aircraft would serve a market with 9 passengers? Those 9 passengers on multiple flights collect in Seattle and then we fly them west to Beijing, Narita, etc. We just added another flight (Shanghai) and are trying to add Haneda. Without this code share, the Seattle international operation would crater. Someone should at least point out that the size of the Seattle base has doubled since the merger.


Here is the problem. From 2007-2012, US air traffic has shrunk by over 10%. Yes shrunk, that is not inflation adjusted or any other type of adjustment, that is an actual 10% shrinkage. Slightly before the merger, in July 2008,, Delta and Northwest together had 10,826 pilots in category, i.e. flying the line. In July 2012 we had 10,644. That is a reduction of 1%. If we had a reduction of 10% to match the drop in traffic then that number should have been 9,743.


Delta has also upgauged their own fleet. How may 160 seat MD-90's does it take to replace 5 100 seat DC-9's? 3. So when you add that up, there should have been a larger drop below 9,700. The reason why Delta has not shrunk our pilot force by 10% is that almost all their drop in capacity has come from the regional carriers. We have lost over 200 aircraft and that number is increasing. Delta has increasingly stolen high dollar market share from UAL, AMR, and LCC and also aggressively increased their charter market share which has saved a lot of our jobs. UAL, AMR, and LCC are all much, much smaller than they were in 2008.

So I can understand everyone's dismay at their lack of progression. Global air traffic has declined based on a near doubling of fuel prices and a global recession. That is what has caused the lack of progression and nothing else. Evidence is pretty strong that without this merger, the individual carriers (DAL/NWA) would have been hit much more deeply.

Every single statistic that DALPA has produced has shown that the Alaska code share has benefited Delta pilots more than Alaska pilots. Essentially, everyone's response has been, don't confuse me with facts I have my opinion. Don't blame your lack of progression on Alaska, it is the drop in global traffic.

There are two market in the US that support two airline hubs: Chicago and New York. Seattle is a great city but it is not in the economic or population class as Chicago and New York. There is no possible way to support two hubs in Seattle. So Delta has a choice: they can try to get into a market share war in Seattle and try to drive Alaska out of business, or they can take advantage of their code share to drive passengers into our international markets from Seattle and grow that way. Which event is more likely to occur, and which event is more likely to result in success for Delta pilots' careers? Does anyone really want to get into a hub war with Alaska right now?

So yes, I will tell you unreservedly that the Alaska code share is good for Delta pilots and helps our careers. The facts are clear and unambiguous. If you are looking for a scape goat on why you haven't progressed you can blame it on Bush or Obama or the Chinese or the bankers or the rich or the poor, or whatever target suits you. Blaming it on the Alaska code share is just wrong headed. Get rid of the Alaska code share and high paying Delta international jobs will go away. Period. If you think we will win a hub war in Seattle you are smoking dope.
alfaromeo is offline  
Old 11-02-2012, 06:10 AM
  #114300  
Gets Weekends Off
 
poostain's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 351
Lightbulb

Originally Posted by alfaromeo
Well before we get into another thrash about Alaska, let's remember one thing. Neither Delta nor Alaska have any control about where each other flies. Our contract does not have any restrictions on where Alaska flies. Can you imagine the outrage at Delta if the Alaska pilots tried to negotiate restrictions on which markets Delta could serve?

What we do have in our contract is restriction on where Delta can place their code. In this case Delta is allowed to place our code on Alaska flights with restrictions. These include:

  1. Limits on the number and/or percentage of seats on any market that can have Delta code
  2. A 4 to 1 hub to hub ratio, meaning for every 1 flight that Alaska has Delta code on between Seattle and a Delta hub, Delta has to have 4 flights with Alaska code on in the same market
  3. This is a pro-rate code share. That means that you share the revenue based on how far the passenger traveled on YOUR METAL


Go back and read #3 again. If someone tries to tell you that Delta can make money on Alaska coded flights without them traveling on a Delta airplane, they are flat out wrong. Delta cannot just sell tickets on Alaska flights and make money. A pro rate is based on miles flown, if you fly 0 miles your share of the revenue is $0. Every time you think that Delta is outsourcing flying to Alaska, just remember this, 0 miles = $0.


So Alaska can add a flight from SLC to SEA, they can add 100 and Delta has no say about it. If Delta places code on ONE Alaska flight, then there must be FOUR Delta flights with Alaska code. Delta cannot replace SLC-SEA with Alaska flights, Delta has to grow on a four to one ratio.


The average amount of passengers that are in any one market on Alaska flights is 9. Does anyone have any idea on which Delta aircraft would serve a market with 9 passengers? Those 9 passengers on multiple flights collect in Seattle and then we fly them west to Beijing, Narita, etc. We just added another flight (Shanghai) and are trying to add Haneda. Without this code share, the Seattle international operation would crater. Someone should at least point out that the size of the Seattle base has doubled since the merger.


Here is the problem. From 2007-2012, US air traffic has shrunk by over 10%. Yes shrunk, that is not inflation adjusted or any other type of adjustment, that is an actual 10% shrinkage. Slightly before the merger, in July 2008,, Delta and Northwest together had 10,826 pilots in category, i.e. flying the line. In July 2012 we had 10,644. That is a reduction of 1%. If we had a reduction of 10% to match the drop in traffic then that number should have been 9,743.


Delta has also upgauged their own fleet. How may 160 seat MD-90's does it take to replace 5 100 seat DC-9's? 3. So when you add that up, there should have been a larger drop below 9,700. The reason why Delta has not shrunk our pilot force by 10% is that almost all their drop in capacity has come from the regional carriers. We have lost over 200 aircraft and that number is increasing. Delta has increasingly stolen high dollar market share from UAL, AMR, and LCC and also aggressively increased their charter market share which has saved a lot of our jobs. UAL, AMR, and LCC are all much, much smaller than they were in 2008.

So I can understand everyone's dismay at their lack of progression. Global air traffic has declined based on a near doubling of fuel prices and a global recession. That is what has caused the lack of progression and nothing else. Evidence is pretty strong that without this merger, the individual carriers (DAL/NWA) would have been hit much more deeply.

Every single statistic that DALPA has produced has shown that the Alaska code share has benefited Delta pilots more than Alaska pilots. Essentially, everyone's response has been, don't confuse me with facts I have my opinion. Don't blame your lack of progression on Alaska, it is the drop in global traffic.

There are two market in the US that support two airline hubs: Chicago and New York. Seattle is a great city but it is not in the economic or population class as Chicago and New York. There is no possible way to support two hubs in Seattle. So Delta has a choice: they can try to get into a market share war in Seattle and try to drive Alaska out of business, or they can take advantage of their code share to drive passengers into our international markets from Seattle and grow that way. Which event is more likely to occur, and which event is more likely to result in success for Delta pilots' careers? Does anyone really want to get into a hub war with Alaska right now?

So yes, I will tell you unreservedly that the Alaska code share is good for Delta pilots and helps our careers. The facts are clear and unambiguous. If you are looking for a scape goat on why you haven't progressed you can blame it on Bush or Obama or the Chinese or the bankers or the rich or the poor, or whatever target suits you. Blaming it on the Alaska code share is just wrong headed. Get rid of the Alaska code share and high paying Delta international jobs will go away. Period. If you think we will win a hub war in Seattle you are smoking dope.
I just got schooled......yikes
poostain is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
On Autopilot
Regional
22594
11-05-2021 07:03 AM
AeroCrewSolut
Delta
153
08-14-2018 12:18 PM
Bill Lumberg
Major
71
06-13-2012 08:36 AM
Quagmire
Major
253
04-16-2011 06:19 AM
JiffyLube
Major
12
03-07-2008 04:27 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices