Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
02-13-2013, 08:21 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: A big one that looks like a little one
Posts: 633
Yes because a short staffed and over worked pilot group routinely turns in 87% A-14. I seriously doubt that even for as devout as some guys are to Delta Air Lines that the company hasn't already slapped a value on good faith. Just look at how we got worked over on the contract. Only 62% voted YES and our A-14 went up.
Food for thought.
Food for thought.
02-13-2013, 08:21 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,538
Significantly off topic...
Does anyone have an internet webpage with a shopping cart. My son's surf/ paddleboard business is going to go on the web and I have compared bunches of the companies (using the various top ten lists) that offer webhosting, domains, shopping carts etc. But it seems like you really never know until you bite the bullet and subscribe to one of them.
As an aside, I found it interesting that godaddy isn't on any of the top ten lists.
Does anyone have an internet webpage with a shopping cart. My son's surf/ paddleboard business is going to go on the web and I have compared bunches of the companies (using the various top ten lists) that offer webhosting, domains, shopping carts etc. But it seems like you really never know until you bite the bullet and subscribe to one of them.
As an aside, I found it interesting that godaddy isn't on any of the top ten lists.
Great free open source provider with unlimited customer support, right up to the CEO if you can't get issues resolved at lower levels (even though it won't come to that).
02-13-2013, 08:23 AM
Moderator
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 6,946
I think a critical component of your hypothesis, which I actually partially agree with, that you're missing, is the unreliable actual retirement data. It'd be one thing for the company to have 120 day notice of each actual retirement, but given our vacancy process, and the variability in actual retirement age (which hasn't been proven yet), the company will need to carry extra heads to prevent a massive retirement surge from toppling our operational performance. So for the next 18-24 months I think you'll see them bleed off bloat. Any growth, or any perceived spike in retirements will likely drive small hiring - which with the flow agreements, furloughs, and PNCL bridge, is exactly what they're now fooled to do. 10 here, 15 here - just like the military leave returns all year.
I wouldn't discount crew resources fiscal prowess as a DALPA conspiracy though. I think they're actually just doing the right thing for the company. Which just may happen to be awful for you, but given my free money coming tomorrow, which I'm not technically contractually obligated to receive, I'll take every dime I can get as a result of their expertise.
I wouldn't discount crew resources fiscal prowess as a DALPA conspiracy though. I think they're actually just doing the right thing for the company. Which just may happen to be awful for you, but given my free money coming tomorrow, which I'm not technically contractually obligated to receive, I'll take every dime I can get as a result of their expertise.
SJ,
The Pilot group is kinda being mislead on the whole retirement age issue. It is said that the average retirement age is around 62.5-63 and that is probably pretty accurate. FWIW any DPMA guy can you the exact age.
All of this is true and would lead you to believe the age 65 issue did not really hurt us as much as we all think it did. I don't like how it is conveniently left out of the discussion that when the retirement age was 60 the average retirement age was about 58 or 57.
Bottom line is the average retirement age just moved up about 5 years not just from 60 to 62.5. Now to be fair, I have not heard anyone say the age only moved up 2.5 years, usually it is just never mentioned that the average age was not 60 prior to the rule change.
Scoop
02-13-2013, 08:26 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Yes because a short staffed and over worked pilot group routinely turns in 87% A-14. I seriously doubt that even for as devout as some guys are to Delta Air Lines that the company hasn't already slapped a value on good faith. Just look at how we got worked over on the contract. Only 62% voted YES and our A-14 went up.
Food for thought.
Food for thought.
I have been on the receiving end of 24 off in 7 at el Paso etc. They can keep you on the road for several months of "hi honey, pay bills, do laundry, by honey" before anything happens.
I fail to see how a vote on the contract relates to the company's ability to keep reserves on the road.
02-13-2013, 08:34 AM
Everyday is a weekend!
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: Seasonal Help
Posts: 317
So I have stumbled, I have fallen short, I have dared and lost, I admit to all those failings. But I was there, fighting the best fight I could and others were sitting on the sidelines carping and crying and complaining. If that makes you feel superior then go ahead. I don't see it that way. I have a camaraderie with those guys that I fought with that will last my lifetime. Those are just as important to me as the monetary gains that we achieved.
02-13-2013, 08:36 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: Decoupled
Posts: 922
Under the new contract, we have allowed reserves to fly to ALV+15. When was the last time the Company expended negoiating capital for something and did not use it?
While reserves are not currently being utilized to ALV+15, yet. I do not think that this low utilization will last.
I hope you are right. I think the Company's intentions will become clear either this or next summer.
02-13-2013, 08:37 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,538
So I see more people griping about how we get smoked in earnings by SWA. So let's talk about that.
According to the SWA profile on APC, Southwest has roughly 570 airplanes and 6400 pilots. So they run around 11 pilots(NOT crews) per airplane. DAL has roughly 720 planes and 11,800 pilots. That works out to roughly 16 pilots per airplane.
So, we can already see that the DAL pilot contract creates MORE jobs(Keep in mind our augmentation requirements are contactual) then the SWA pilot contract. HOWEVER, some people on here complain non stop about poor pay and stagnation. So what do you think will happen if DAL pilots successfully obtain a contract which essentially is identical to the SWA pilot contract? Just sit back and think, because if you think we're experiencing stagnation now you can expect even more for SWA pilot contract.
According to the SWA profile on APC, Southwest has roughly 570 airplanes and 6400 pilots. So they run around 11 pilots(NOT crews) per airplane. DAL has roughly 720 planes and 11,800 pilots. That works out to roughly 16 pilots per airplane.
So, we can already see that the DAL pilot contract creates MORE jobs(Keep in mind our augmentation requirements are contactual) then the SWA pilot contract. HOWEVER, some people on here complain non stop about poor pay and stagnation. So what do you think will happen if DAL pilots successfully obtain a contract which essentially is identical to the SWA pilot contract? Just sit back and think, because if you think we're experiencing stagnation now you can expect even more for SWA pilot contract.
But they don't do supplimental ops not because its not in their contract, but because they don't do that type of flying. They also only have 1 fleet type (transitioning from 1 to 2, quickly back to 1). That is the overwhelming vast majority of the 16-11 split.
DL can never get to one fleet type, and our CBA is costed out in such a way that they willingly take a pretty large manpower hit to keep multipile redundant fleets even within the same size gauge. While they could never get to one fleet type, they could do way better than the 9 or so we have, yet they don't seem motivated in the slightest to do so. That translates into a large lack of productivity that is pretty huge, yet over all the company doesn't seem to mind it at all. There's a reason for that.
02-13-2013, 08:38 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Called tech ops. He believes the average usage on the MD88/90 fleet is right at 8 hours a day. He is going to try and get the exact numbers and get back to me however he said its the lowest fleet. That compares to 10.8 I think you posted for 2012 and the 10.5 number I posted for SW in 2011. Highest utilization rates are the international aircraft which exceed 16 hours a day in many cases and bring our overall fleet average way up.
On the comment about NRT I was not referring to aircraft utilization but rather pilot block hours. The operation is very inefficient on a block hour basis with tons of credit. The same applies to our limited inter Africa flying. That also has to be considered when looking at numbers but aids your side of the discussion not mine.
On the comment about NRT I was not referring to aircraft utilization but rather pilot block hours. The operation is very inefficient on a block hour basis with tons of credit. The same applies to our limited inter Africa flying. That also has to be considered when looking at numbers but aids your side of the discussion not mine.
Working off a napkin at chipotle, 8 hours a day for an 88... 2922 hours per year... at current crew ratio 4.766... 613 hours vs swa 744 hours per pilot...
Issue: if 30 crews are sent packing off the 88 as seems likely from crew planning newsletter the ratio drops to 4.6. At 4.0 we equal their 744/hrs/yr productivity and we seem to be trending more towards their efficiency than away or maintaining where we are, no?
More numbers would be interesting, because if we approach their productivity per hour we got some factors to add in such as revenue per pilot, tafb productivity, not to mention pay. Im still not buying the notion swa pilots work themselves to death and that's why you see crews averaging $380k combined flying a 737-700. Im afraid we are headed towards swa efficiency without the pay and time off despite our value, ie revenue per pilot wwhich should be increasing til we hire.
As to international jets, no doubt they fly more, but the 3428 estimate is only on domestic jets. It was derived from rumored 1.9M BH divided by non etops jets. And breaking out the efficiency of the 767 fleet is hard when pilots are flying not international and domestic. Not sure how you do it without internal numbers ad even then whether thats usable. That's why I don't use the numbers.
02-13-2013, 08:40 AM
Runs with scissors
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,728
Well...everyone said they wanted all the RJ flying back at mainline, what did we think would happen when the company flushed 200 RJ 50's and replaced them with mainline jets?
Just wait until we see the 717 trips!
Before Com Air got RJ 50's and we gave them 50% of our flying (1992-3), I was flying the MD88 out of CVG. We had 4 day trips, 5-6 legs a day, that never left Ohio! If you were lucky you might make it all the way to Detroit, or Indy, or FWA. 45 minutes of flying, with 2 hours of sitting every time you went through CVG.
I saw a lot of Dayton and Columbus!
So now we are going back to that type flying, so...do we want that or not? Somebody has to do it. I'd rather it were being done by Mainline Pilots in mainline airframes.
02-13-2013, 08:40 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,503
I found out a long time ago that if you step up and actually do something to improve pilots' lives, rather than just writing about it on a webboard, that you will subject yourself to this type of personal attack. I am so used to it by now that it just rolls off me like water on the windshield.
If you ever decide to get off your butt and actually do something, then you will find out that solutions are never as easy as they seem. It is ironic that the same people that go ballistic on this forum over the "FLY" button on the Delta safety video, then act as if there is a "GET MORE" button at the union office, and the only thing we need to do is push that button and money will flow like the Mississippi in April.
If it were that easy then someone at American, or United, or Continental, or Southwest, or US Airways would have pressed that button a long time ago. Remember American took 6 years and they never found that button, Airtran 7 years, United 3 years, Continental 4 years. Why oh why did they not push that button? Is it just that Carl, and TOGA, and Purple knew where the button was and didn't tell them, or is it because that button does not exist.
I think you can tell that the button does not exist. There is only one thing. Work. Grinding, difficult, stressful work. Of course you don't know that because you have never done it, instead you choose to denigrate those that work on your behalf. But hey, we have a free country so you can say what you want. I just ask all the readers to decide which theory is more plausible; is there some magic button to push or is there just a series of extremely difficult problems to solve and solving them is neither easy nor free of problems. You decide.
The fact is that our deal was the trigger that broke the entire industry out of the bankruptcy era. United followed us. American is directly hanging onto our coattails. US Airways is just along for the ride with American. Without our deal, we are stuck for years and years in stasis.
If you ever decide to get off your butt and actually do something, then you will find out that solutions are never as easy as they seem. It is ironic that the same people that go ballistic on this forum over the "FLY" button on the Delta safety video, then act as if there is a "GET MORE" button at the union office, and the only thing we need to do is push that button and money will flow like the Mississippi in April.
If it were that easy then someone at American, or United, or Continental, or Southwest, or US Airways would have pressed that button a long time ago. Remember American took 6 years and they never found that button, Airtran 7 years, United 3 years, Continental 4 years. Why oh why did they not push that button? Is it just that Carl, and TOGA, and Purple knew where the button was and didn't tell them, or is it because that button does not exist.
I think you can tell that the button does not exist. There is only one thing. Work. Grinding, difficult, stressful work. Of course you don't know that because you have never done it, instead you choose to denigrate those that work on your behalf. But hey, we have a free country so you can say what you want. I just ask all the readers to decide which theory is more plausible; is there some magic button to push or is there just a series of extremely difficult problems to solve and solving them is neither easy nor free of problems. You decide.
The fact is that our deal was the trigger that broke the entire industry out of the bankruptcy era. United followed us. American is directly hanging onto our coattails. US Airways is just along for the ride with American. Without our deal, we are stuck for years and years in stasis.
Alpha, your service was appreciated. Your grinding, difficult, stressful work on behalf of our pilots. However, your vision of our deal being the trigger that broke the entire industry out of the bankruptcy era is flawed at best, narcissistic at worse.
You seem to forget, or constantly discount, the role that Hawaiian led with prior to Delta's emergence from 1113. They offered the template for a respectful deal. They were able to secure;
1. Pay rates that far exceeded ours.
2. Larger contribution to their 401k.
3. Retained their retirement plans.
Nearly a decade later, look at how a career post bankruptcy at Hawaiian is vastly different than one at Delta. Their retention coming out of BK along with the lack of job draining scope and JV's has helped them where it has sowed stagnation at Delta.
Enjoy your new horizons.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
