Kargo

For all those Easybid users out there;

I'm using easy bid to select specific pairings, awarding one pairing per line (2. Award pairings if pairing number XXXX, 3. Award pairings if ...). Easy bid is putting the last pairing I have selected (ie the least preferable) at the top of my bid and the first pairing I bid (the most preferable) at the bottom.

Does this make sense with PBS logic? I thought it treated the top and left as the most preferable, and the bottom and right as the least preferable. Thus it eliminates trips from bottom to top, right to left.

Very, very confused former box hauler. Thanks for your help. kargo

contrails

Delta Redefines Cabin, Upgrades Premium Economy Options

Scoop

I agree. We would be Fools (yes with a capitol "F") to monetize PS now. If the company wants to drag out negotiations ala RLA - let them.

Who cares what Wall Street thinks. I mean a contract is a contract - right?

I get that Wall Street is important but worrying about a company that is paying too much into PS because they are too profitable is like a billionaire worrying that he is paying too much in taxes. Both are great problems to have.

These good times might last 5 years or end next week. Lets enjoy the ride with our increasing PS and not even consider monetizing it under the present circumstances.

Scoop

forgot to bid

I agree. I bet it goes to $50 and back to $90 by next year. That said, what then of the ME Airlines?

Sink r8

I honestly don't know. I would guess that the countries in question are committed to diversifying away from oil, and this only motivates them more. It does take a little bit of their advantage in having very new, fuel-efficient aircraft.

Also, I don't really understand the nature of their advantage in fuel costs in and of itself. Is it greatest when oil is cheap, or expensive? Do they refine enough in-country? Do they tanker fuel a lot?

Then there are economic conditions: since I don't know how much of an advantage they might have in oil/regulatory/labor, I don't know whether they get squeezed proportionately more than others, when economies are bad throughout the world. They're mostly set-up to carry people between Europe and Asia. If Europe is weak, the Euro is weak, Asia is OK, and their own oil revenues are down, I guess they become very, very eager to tap into our market, where the economy would be better, and the $ is going up.

I'm guessing that with a huge amount of orders, weakening local revenues, the ME carriers got bat-$hit crazy, and flood the trans-Atlantic with seats. They haven't shown any restraint in pushing their regulatory and geographic advantages. Until they really start really bleeding their owners' money, they won't stop. I don't know if we can afford to subsidize our international with healthy domestic, faster than they can subsidize their international with diminishing oil revenues. I doubt our BOD would let us try that game anyway.

What I'm really trying to say is: I have no idea.

Razorback one

Yep. That's the way it does it. You have a few choices to make it work.

1. Pick trips in reverse order. Pick the best trip last and the worst trip first. They will show up in EZBid in the proper order.

2. (My method) Pick trips in order of preference. Then, drag and drop them into the correct order.

3. Put them on one line. I think that EZBid was designed this way, but as PBS has changed, this method may not produce the desired result.

PM me if you have more questions.

Razorback one

Pineapple Guy

First off, I didn't say anything about "on a percentage basis". I said our flying could go up as a result of this JV. I don't believe for one minute that Delta does JV flying just to screw the pilots, or shift revenue flights from Delta to the JV partner. They do it to expand their total presence in markets where they can't expand themselves due to slot restrictions (as with LHR) or the market doesn't justify us going it alone (as with other JV partners).

Of course, I wish every passenger in the world was on a Delta jet. But that's not reality, imo.

As for agreeing to it just to increase PS. NO, of course not to that too. But people I trust (MEC, Negotiating Committee, and ALPA E&FA) have all looked at this ten times (probably more like 100 times) as long as you or I, so if they believe it is in our best interests, I defer to them.

Rudder

PG,

I would also defer to the negotiating committee on their knowledge of this or any agreement, but in NO WAY defer to them with respect to giving up items in our contract without getting adequate items in return, which is what we have done time and time again.

We have failed basic negotiating over and over again, but yet the trend continues.

AirCav

I conversed at length with a negotiating committee member (well before he was in that position), and while he was a nice guy, cared about the pilots and seemed pretty selfless, he struck me as being incredibly naive. He spent time trying to tell me how great Anderson was and how management loved pilots and they were "on our side". After the trip, I realized we do not always have the sharpest tools negotiating and we were at the mercy of management showing up with shiny beads and free lattes. Loyalty in the union is rewarded with positions like this and Moak rewarded this guy well. He placed a a guy on the committee that would agree to anything management said.

Purple Drank

This entire post is spin and disingenuous speculation.

"trickle down into increased profit sharing checks?" That's your spin? That's how you think we'll benefit from this JV and this TA?

That's absolutely pathetic.


So the NC negotiated this useless TA without any idea what the consequences would be?

you "suspect...?" That's great. I've got to ask: is your mission to further management's goals? Or is it to help dues-paying pilots get more money and more time off?