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 09-26-2008, 06:33 PM
  #1871  
Gets Weekends Off
 
NuGuy's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,903
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
Relevent Delta contract section

b. the pilot seniority lists of the Company and the acquired airline will be integrated
pursuant to Association merger policy if both groups are represented by the
Association, or if the airmen of the acquired airline are not represented by the
Association, then pursuant to a method to be determined by the Delta MEC.
1) However, in either case, the integrated seniority list produced by the Association,
including any attendant conditions and restrictions, will be subject to the approval of the Company, and will be submitted to the Company for approval within
twelve months of the date the Company or any affiliate acquired control of the
acquired airline. The Company will provide the Association with its decision as
to approval or disapproval (including its reasons for disapproval) of the integrated
seniority list produced by the Association within two months following receipt of
the integrated seniority list. If the Association does not without good cause
produce and present an integrated seniority list to the Company for approval
within twelve months of the date the Company or any affiliate acquired control of
the acquired airline, the pilot and airman seniority lists of the Company and the
acquired airline, respectively, will be integrated pursuant to the arbitration
procedures set forth in
Section 1 D. 8. b. 2).
2) If the Company rejects the list produced by the

Added note, USAIR management had to except the list produced in their binding arbitration which they did.

Heyas,

Sorry guys, this section was overridden with new language from the JPWA, TFA and SLI letter.

DAL has no right to reject the list unless it's a bump and flush, which will never happen.

Try again...

Nu
NuGuy is offline  
Old 09-26-2008, 07:50 PM
  #1872  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by NuGuy
Heyas,

Sorry guys, this section was overridden with new language from the JPWA, TFA and SLI letter.

DAL has no right to reject the list unless it's a bump and flush, which will never happen.

Try again...

Nu
Yes...that was my understanding as well. I don't have the new JPWA, TFA and SLI letter to prove it though.

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 09-26-2008, 08:03 PM
  #1873  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Hawaii50's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: 757 Left
Posts: 1,308
Default

Originally Posted by NuGuy
Try again...

Nu
Try again? I think most of us here who are hoping for fences don't want the company to have the ability to reject the list because fences are imposed by the arbitrators. Soooo, I really hope you're right.
Hawaii50 is offline  
Old 09-27-2008, 12:40 AM
  #1874  
Gets Weekends Off
 
KC10 FATboy's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 4,105
Default

Have any of you all heard of a new Boston pilot base flying 757ER (2-man crew only) to european destinations?

Or, a 75/76 in CVG going ER?

-Fatty
KC10 FATboy is offline  
Old 09-27-2008, 04:38 AM
  #1875  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,599
Default

Originally Posted by KC10 FATboy
Have any of you all heard of a new Boston pilot base flying 757ER (2-man crew only) to european destinations?

Or, a 75/76 in CVG going ER?

-Fatty
I spoke with crew resources 3 days ago about the coming bid. It is still planned for the first half of Oct. It will be for the most part a 777 bid however there will be backfill. I asked about new bases. The CVG rumor is just that a rumor. He said there has never been any consideration on their part to opening a base. There is simply no need for it. The flying is covered at almost no credit by the ATL and JFK basis. In the Winter CVG only has 3 international flights and 5 in the summer. Same with Boston. There would be no need and they would get killed on reserve coverage. It can all be covered out of JFK via 6 day trips with zero credit.

I will see if I can find the language in the new contract that would invalidate the text I posted. I don't have a copy of the new contract to research but will find one. I don't believe there was any changes in LOA 10 in that section so it would have to be in the joint contract.
sailingfun is offline  
Old 09-27-2008, 05:07 AM
  #1876  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,599
Default

Nothing in the Joint contract amends the sections I posted. There may be something in the SLI agreement however you would expect there would have been a amendment in the joint contract since quite a bit of the scope section was changed. I will see if I can find the SLI agreement later.
sailingfun is offline  
Old 09-27-2008, 05:26 AM
  #1877  
Gets Weekends Off
 
dragon's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Dismayed
Posts: 1,598
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
I spoke with crew resources 3 days ago about the coming bid. It is still planned for the first half of Oct. It will be for the most part a 777 bid however there will be backfill. I asked about new bases. The CVG rumor is just that a rumor. He said there has never been any consideration on their part to opening a base. There is simply no need for it. The flying is covered at almost no credit by the ATL and JFK basis. In the Winter CVG only has 3 international flights and 5 in the summer. Same with Boston. There would be no need and they would get killed on reserve coverage. It can all be covered out of JFK via 6 day trips with zero credit.

I will see if I can find the language in the new contract that would invalidate the text I posted. I don't have a copy of the new contract to research but will find one. I don't believe there was any changes in LOA 10 in that section so it would have to be in the joint contract.
I'm not doubting your sources at crew resources, but I was told by both the ACP and the FOM for CVG that the 7ER is a plan that is being looked at. There is a strong business case for it (their words).
dragon is offline  
Old 09-27-2008, 05:46 AM
  #1878  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,599
Default

What business case could there be for a ER base in CVG? The flying is easily covered as mentioned by ATL and JFK. A small category like that would be very inefficient. My source was Randy in crew resources. The said he has been getting tons of phone calls about a ER base in CVG and can't figure out where the rumors are coming from but its never been under consideration.
sailingfun is offline  
Old 09-27-2008, 05:55 AM
  #1879  
Gets Weekends Off
 
dragon's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Dismayed
Posts: 1,598
Default

The way it was explained to me (all errors are mine), since we currently have 5 international departures a day from CVG (dropping to 3 soon) using ATL and NYC crews if one of them turns back, they run out of crew day and without the ability to get a crew together quickly, they lose the flight. If that happens more than 4-6 times in a 18 month period they offset the cost of the training cost of about 1.2M$. I think Terry said it had happened about 5 times in the past 18 months or so.

The big fear was about moves since the entire category would be displaced.

There is a discussion in the latest version of Pireps.
dragon is offline  
Old 09-27-2008, 06:04 AM
  #1880  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,599
Default

I fly those flights often. I am sure now and then there is a turnback however in general a flight with any problem that would require a turnback is sent to JFK where it can be fixed and recrewed easily or a equipment swap done. If it were something that required getting the aircraft on the ground ASAP unless it was right after takeoff you would not go back anyway and if you did there are no spare aircraft in CVG. There are lots of places to land in a emergency. Most turnbacks are minor etops issues and again those flights are sent to JFK if they are airborne. With DTW becomine a Delta hub I would be very surprised if long term we even keep international flights in CVG. The traffic is almost all connecting traffic. It would make more sense to route the traffic through DTW where you also have more O&D traffic.
sailingfun 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