Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
08-06-2009, 10:45 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
08-06-2009, 10:51 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
Also, how do you explain that three of the individuals that will be running this fall all work quite closely with the MEC on a myriad of issues, and all of them say that they can no longer sit by and watch us continue down this path. That tells me that they are upset enough to become part of the MEC.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 08-06-2009 at 11:54 AM.
08-06-2009, 12:24 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,902
Okay, let's imagine that whatever scope clause you want to negotiate for has been agreed to in principle by management. Now you have to come up with a way to implement the change. How do you see that going?
Do you think that Delta would sign an agreement on Tuesday and then on Wednesday all those pilots at CMR, ASA, etc. would be out of a job and then Delta would have to hire a few thousand pilots in one day?
Do you think that Delta would sign an agreement on Tuesday and then on Wednesday all those pilots at CMR, ASA, etc. would be out of a job and then Delta would have to hire a few thousand pilots in one day?
I would point out that the DAL MEC is in business for one reason, and one reason only, and that's to protect the interests of DAL & Compass pilots, and not, as some would think, to further the political asparations of certain parts of its leadership or to protect other group's pilots. The opinions of those at other airlines should not figure into the discussion.
There was certainly no trouble "implementing the changes" when scope was going in the other direction, where hundereds of DAL and NWA pilots were laid off while Comair, ASA, Pinnacle and whoever else were hiring 100's of pilots a year. They sure modified the gates in MEM, MSP and DTW for RJs in a big, big hurry to the tune of $$$$, while the external power units at the mainline gates were mostly inop.
There also was no difficulty in finding aircraft that previously had a waiting list "for years". Once the change was made, and ENTIRE airline was spooled up in 12 months, and these previously "unavailable" aircraft materialized at the gate literally overnight.
So spare us the faux "troubles". When trying to get positive changes, all of a sudden, the IT department says it will take months to implement, yet when something that benefits the company occurs, the same programming efforts are completed overnight.
The fact of the matter is a reasoned, methodical draw down of scooter flying could occur as contracts/leases expire. Once those aircraft are gone, a ratcheting down of scope could occur. At one point, NWA had an exemption for the Avro aircraft at MSA. They ran one into a gate, but it COULD NOT be replaced, because the aircraft were permitted only by serial number.
So as RJs leave the fleet, the noose can be tightened. To say otherwise, and lay the blame on "operational issues" is complete hooey.
Nu
Last edited by NuGuy; 08-06-2009 at 01:02 PM.
08-06-2009, 12:53 PM
Moderator
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 6,991
Guys,
Scope should not be a senior vs. junior issue. Scope is more than just RJs. Scope covers International code shares, Joint Ventures, domestic code share, wholly owned carriers, DCI contract carriers and what other abomination our crack management team can conceive of to lower labor cost-no matter how negatively it affects our product. It seems on this Forum the scope issue is confined to RJs - which is why it is paramount to the junior guys. I’m sure the senior guys are very interested in International code shares and JVs.
Scope concerns all DAL pilots. Bar is correct - united we have a lot of clout - if we splinter off into little groups management will slowly but surely pick us and our contract apart. Why should the senior guys hold the line on 70 seat RJs - the same reason the junior guys should hold the line on wide-body international code shares - Unified we have a lot more clout to get that pay restoration. Pay is starting to creep up, much too slowly but hell - look at how successful Jet-Blue pilots have been in raising compensation.
Just suppose we cave on 100 seat scope. In 2 years how much ability will DALPA have to stop management when they try to introduce some form of 3rd party wide-body international flying? Zero. DAL management learned a lot from the Comair strike. By conceding on 70 and 76 seaters we are playing right into their hands. As we keep caving on scope we will soon find ourselves without an effective self-help option. Tell that to the senior guys who think they can get a hefty pay-raise by conceding on scope at the bottom.
For better or worse - we are all in this together.
One more thing – when you look back on airline history, at what early pilots had to deal with, we as a group today are a pretty pitiful lot if a senior pilot saying “I don’t care about anyone but myself,” is not an anomaly but the norm.
Scoop
Scope should not be a senior vs. junior issue. Scope is more than just RJs. Scope covers International code shares, Joint Ventures, domestic code share, wholly owned carriers, DCI contract carriers and what other abomination our crack management team can conceive of to lower labor cost-no matter how negatively it affects our product. It seems on this Forum the scope issue is confined to RJs - which is why it is paramount to the junior guys. I’m sure the senior guys are very interested in International code shares and JVs.
Scope concerns all DAL pilots. Bar is correct - united we have a lot of clout - if we splinter off into little groups management will slowly but surely pick us and our contract apart. Why should the senior guys hold the line on 70 seat RJs - the same reason the junior guys should hold the line on wide-body international code shares - Unified we have a lot more clout to get that pay restoration. Pay is starting to creep up, much too slowly but hell - look at how successful Jet-Blue pilots have been in raising compensation.
Just suppose we cave on 100 seat scope. In 2 years how much ability will DALPA have to stop management when they try to introduce some form of 3rd party wide-body international flying? Zero. DAL management learned a lot from the Comair strike. By conceding on 70 and 76 seaters we are playing right into their hands. As we keep caving on scope we will soon find ourselves without an effective self-help option. Tell that to the senior guys who think they can get a hefty pay-raise by conceding on scope at the bottom.
For better or worse - we are all in this together.
One more thing – when you look back on airline history, at what early pilots had to deal with, we as a group today are a pretty pitiful lot if a senior pilot saying “I don’t care about anyone but myself,” is not an anomaly but the norm.
Scoop
08-06-2009, 01:04 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,902
Guys,
Scope should not be a senior vs. junior issue. Scope is more than just RJs. Scope covers International code shares, Joint Ventures, domestic code share, wholly owned carriers, DCI contract carriers and what other abomination our crack management team can conceive of to lower labor cost-no matter how negatively it affects our product. It seems on this Forum the scope issue is confined to RJs - which is why it is paramount to the junior guys. I’m sure the senior guys are very interested in International code shares and JVs.
Scope concerns all DAL pilots. Bar is correct - united we have a lot of clout - if we splinter off into little groups management will slowly but surely pick us and our contract apart. Why should the senior guys hold the line on 70 seat RJs - the same reason the junior guys should hold the line on wide-body international code shares - Unified we have a lot more clout to get that pay restoration. Pay is starting to creep up, much too slowly but hell - look at how successful Jet-Blue pilots have been in raising compensation.
Just suppose we cave on 100 seat scope. In 2 years how much ability will DALPA have to stop management when they try to introduce some form of 3rd party wide-body international flying? Zero. DAL management learned a lot from the Comair strike. By conceding on 70 and 76 seaters we are playing right into their hands. As we keep caving on scope we will soon find ourselves without an effective self-help option. Tell that to the senior guys who think they can get a hefty pay-raise by conceding on scope at the bottom.
For better or worse - we are all in this together.
One more thing – when you look back on airline history, at what early pilots had to deal with, we as a group today are a pretty pitiful lot if a senior pilot saying “I don’t care about anyone but myself,” is not an anomaly but the norm.
Scoop
Scope should not be a senior vs. junior issue. Scope is more than just RJs. Scope covers International code shares, Joint Ventures, domestic code share, wholly owned carriers, DCI contract carriers and what other abomination our crack management team can conceive of to lower labor cost-no matter how negatively it affects our product. It seems on this Forum the scope issue is confined to RJs - which is why it is paramount to the junior guys. I’m sure the senior guys are very interested in International code shares and JVs.
Scope concerns all DAL pilots. Bar is correct - united we have a lot of clout - if we splinter off into little groups management will slowly but surely pick us and our contract apart. Why should the senior guys hold the line on 70 seat RJs - the same reason the junior guys should hold the line on wide-body international code shares - Unified we have a lot more clout to get that pay restoration. Pay is starting to creep up, much too slowly but hell - look at how successful Jet-Blue pilots have been in raising compensation.
Just suppose we cave on 100 seat scope. In 2 years how much ability will DALPA have to stop management when they try to introduce some form of 3rd party wide-body international flying? Zero. DAL management learned a lot from the Comair strike. By conceding on 70 and 76 seaters we are playing right into their hands. As we keep caving on scope we will soon find ourselves without an effective self-help option. Tell that to the senior guys who think they can get a hefty pay-raise by conceding on scope at the bottom.
For better or worse - we are all in this together.
One more thing – when you look back on airline history, at what early pilots had to deal with, we as a group today are a pretty pitiful lot if a senior pilot saying “I don’t care about anyone but myself,” is not an anomaly but the norm.
Scoop
Nu
08-06-2009, 01:08 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: Flying the SEC
Posts: 2,350
Scoop, are you going to run?
Alfa, here is one solution. Have it written in the contract that no new DCI contracts can be written and all the current ones would be allowed to expire. Also have it written that every new a/c that is added must be flown by Delta pilots and F/As.
That would stop the bleeding and prevent any future DCI growth at our expense.
Alfa, here is one solution. Have it written in the contract that no new DCI contracts can be written and all the current ones would be allowed to expire. Also have it written that every new a/c that is added must be flown by Delta pilots and F/As.
That would stop the bleeding and prevent any future DCI growth at our expense.
08-06-2009, 01:12 PM
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: The Beginnings
Posts: 1,317
I dont know if this has anything to do with it but i've been hearing alot lately that DALPA wants flow agreements in place with all or most of the DCI carriers. It would help bring the pilot groups together to push for a common goal. It would also provide further furlough protection to mainline pilots because the flowback costs would increase even more so than right now with just the CPZ/Mesaba flow. We'll see
In this instance, a flow back may be fairly cheap for the company, as I don't see many DAL guys jumping at the chance to head Comair (or Mesaba, etc.), and the company probably knows it.
The flow "up", however, would probably mean DAL would pretty much relinquish a fair amount of hiring authority and candidate screening. This is a good or bad thing, based on your own personal opinion of the penultimate "Deltoid".
08-06-2009, 01:20 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,619
Alpha, my version of a road map has been put down here several times, but I don't mind a bit laying it out again:
The Dude's steps to scope restoration -
From there the road map depends a lot on our ALPA Reps and I'm not going to presume to know how the 8 other DCI carriers are going to sort themselves out. We represent the Compass pilots, but no other DCI carrier and do not have authority to speak for them.
But, I envision that if they see a real benefit to ALPA unity, they will have a strong desire to get on board and ultimately the Delta MEC retains control of that process. We will have set a precedent of success that can be built on.
Unity is a much stronger force than our current ALPA leadership recognizes.That is an excellent question. I have to answer that if they are seeking a solution, they have flat out lied to throw us off track and if they are seeking a solution it would be a 180 degree course reversal from ALPA policy since the days that Randall Babbitt was at Eastern.
What is more likely is that our Reps are being honest and that they continue down the same misguided path that got us into this mess. All flow throughs do is legitimize outsourcing. They are no substitute for real job protection, or unity.
If we do not take the first baby step of getting Compass on board the flow through will simply act like a turd in the toilet. It might hold back the flush for a minute, but eventually the pressure will build until the turd goes down at a higher velocity carrying more water in its wake.
Worse, I fear ALPA will facilitate simply spinning Compass off while finding a way to cancel the flow agreement, in doing so unplugging the current blockage all while getting nothing substantial in return.
After all, if we refuse to perform an economic analysis of Compass's value, how do we know what it is worth when we sell it back to management?
We have to perform steps one and two of my road map, regardless.
The Dude's steps to scope restoration -
- Begin with a candid evaluation, including economic analysis of what has worked and what has failed in previous scope negotiations.
- Follow up with economic analysis of the benefits of unity. See what value there is in unity, putting this in cold hard economic terms.
- Begin with small steps, like the 300 pilots at Compass while our MEC still represents both groups. Move them over in flow order, accepting status quo on their contract (if need be) to signal ALPA's policy reversal on outsourcing. (or throw a bone to the senior guys and get them a buck an hour earned through the 14 extra seats on the outsourced jets brought back to mainline). If not already accomplished, this step should be triggered with the first Delta pilot being displaced to Compass. IMHO the Delta MEC owes this to the Delta pilots they represent.
- Concomitant with bringing Compass (or anyone else) on board, the corresponding scope hole would have to be closed (management says they do not want any more 76 seaters anyway). In the case of Compass, their special scope allowance would be removed and the fleet ratio triggers be reset by reducing outsourced jets and increasing mainline jets in the same number.
- Then aggressively investigate the alleged scope violations at Republic. Insist that there is only one answer to management's intentional violation of our agreement and that is to abide by our agreement by staffing those jets with mainline pilots.
From there the road map depends a lot on our ALPA Reps and I'm not going to presume to know how the 8 other DCI carriers are going to sort themselves out. We represent the Compass pilots, but no other DCI carrier and do not have authority to speak for them.
But, I envision that if they see a real benefit to ALPA unity, they will have a strong desire to get on board and ultimately the Delta MEC retains control of that process. We will have set a precedent of success that can be built on.
Unity is a much stronger force than our current ALPA leadership recognizes.That is an excellent question. I have to answer that if they are seeking a solution, they have flat out lied to throw us off track and if they are seeking a solution it would be a 180 degree course reversal from ALPA policy since the days that Randall Babbitt was at Eastern.
What is more likely is that our Reps are being honest and that they continue down the same misguided path that got us into this mess. All flow throughs do is legitimize outsourcing. They are no substitute for real job protection, or unity.
If we do not take the first baby step of getting Compass on board the flow through will simply act like a turd in the toilet. It might hold back the flush for a minute, but eventually the pressure will build until the turd goes down at a higher velocity carrying more water in its wake.
Worse, I fear ALPA will facilitate simply spinning Compass off while finding a way to cancel the flow agreement, in doing so unplugging the current blockage all while getting nothing substantial in return.
After all, if we refuse to perform an economic analysis of Compass's value, how do we know what it is worth when we sell it back to management?
We have to perform steps one and two of my road map, regardless.
When you talk about making an assessment of what has worked and hasn't worked, that goes on constantly. You have to make that assessment along with the conditions of the time. It is pretty easy to waltz into this group and after two years proclaim you have all the easy answers to this. If it were easy it would have been done.
You say ALPA lied to you about scope or about their strategy. Expound upon that. Exactly what ALPA policies are you talking about? What does Randy Babbitt have to do with anything? What is the official ALPA policy on outsourcing?
You think we should solve a small problem (Compass) and then use that as an example to solve the bigger problem. I happen to think you should try to find a global solution to the entire problem, Compass is just a blip here. If you add Compass to our list, and Delta decides to furlough, then you will still have Delta pilots furloughed, it is just they will be E-175 pilots instead of DC-9 and MD-88 pilots. I don't see that as much of a comprehensive solution.
I disagree about the value of flow through. I think it is a great first step to getting a linkage between mainline and connection carriers. After that linkage is established, then you have to strengthen and then shorten that linkage until you have pulled back in the flying you need.
You still haven't answered the major questions about how to integrate in the new group. You can't just say, "let's do Compass, and the rest is a rounding error". Without addressing those real solutions you are not realistically looking at the problem. Again, problems are easy, solutions are hard. You basically punt on the solution part and fall back into a bunch of pablum about ALPA conspiracy.
We have a bunch of lawyers, and I am sure they have looked at the Republic deal every which way but loose. I am sure Delta has looked into it because they are not happy with what Republic is doing either. If either party could force Republic to quit what they are doing they would do it. Again, you act like there is some conspiracy to avoid enforcing the contract, that is just silly talk.
08-06-2009, 01:48 PM
Underboob King
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Guppy Commander
Posts: 4,412
I guess that's nice. Personally though, I have no desire to flow back to a place like, say, Comair. Talk about a hostile work environment!
In this instance, a flow back may be fairly cheap for the company, as I don't see many DAL guys jumping at the chance to head Comair (or Mesaba, etc.), and the company probably knows it.
The flow "up", however, would probably mean DAL would pretty much relinquish a fair amount of hiring authority and candidate screening. This is a good or bad thing, based on your own personal opinion of the penultimate "Deltoid".
In this instance, a flow back may be fairly cheap for the company, as I don't see many DAL guys jumping at the chance to head Comair (or Mesaba, etc.), and the company probably knows it.
The flow "up", however, would probably mean DAL would pretty much relinquish a fair amount of hiring authority and candidate screening. This is a good or bad thing, based on your own personal opinion of the penultimate "Deltoid".
08-06-2009, 01:57 PM
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: The Beginnings
Posts: 1,317
Here's some happy [sic] thoughts:
It has just occurred to me that a SWA takeover of F9 would give them access to gates in ATL (and Dulles, as well).
Although I doubt this is their primary reason for their BK bid, this could very well be a long term back door strategy to getting into DAL's backyard. I hasten to add that SWA in ATL probably wouldn't be all that great for AirTran, either.
You never know with SWA . . . . those sneaky buggers have some smart people on their long term strategic planning boards. When ATA was acquired by SWA, I don't think anyone in ATL expected to see SWA in LGA 2 years later.
It has just occurred to me that a SWA takeover of F9 would give them access to gates in ATL (and Dulles, as well).
Although I doubt this is their primary reason for their BK bid, this could very well be a long term back door strategy to getting into DAL's backyard. I hasten to add that SWA in ATL probably wouldn't be all that great for AirTran, either.
You never know with SWA . . . . those sneaky buggers have some smart people on their long term strategic planning boards. When ATA was acquired by SWA, I don't think anyone in ATL expected to see SWA in LGA 2 years later.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
