Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
04-04-2010, 08:17 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Aviation Week had a good article this week on the slot swap. I can't link it but I'll rewrite a good section with in it.
---
Delta Air Lines and US Airways are making a last-ditch effort to save a slot swap that would give Delta a dominant prescence at New York's LaGuardia Airport and US Airways the same at Reagan Washington National Airport. In the process, the carriers are simultaneously challenging the FAA and offering to partially accomodate it; pitting four U.S. and Canadian low-cost carriers against the biggest U.S. low-cost carrier, Southwest Airlines; and again raising the larger question of who actually owns takeoff and landing slots at U.S. slot-controlled airports
---
The FAA agress there would be public benefits from the deal - notably plans by both carriers to use bigger jets and the expansion and preservation of services to small communities. The rub came in its conclusion that the slow swap, if approved withou conditions, would be too harmful to fare-lowering competition.
---
After explaining what the FAA is demanding:
Delta and US Airways call those conditions a deal-braker, but they are trying to salvage it with what appears to be a two-pronged strategy. One prong is to question the legality of the proposed conditions - and warn the FAA it might be facing a court battle if it does not eliminate them. Delta and US Airways have some support: United and Continental airlines also filed comments challenging the FAA's authority.
One argument all of them make is that the law only gives the FAA the authority to promote safe and efficient use of airspace, not to assess and address impacts on competition, which, the airlines say, is primarily the purview of the Justice Department and, to a lesser extent, the Transportation secretary- who is a straight up ***.
Whoops. FTB add something there. Sorry about that. ^^ should just say "the Transportation secretary."
The Justice Department did not object to the slot swap, but on March 24 it filed comments supporting the FAA's tentative decision to make the slot divestiture a condition of FAA approval.
Another point, as argued by Delta, US Airways and Continental, is that the conditions would violate the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment protection against the government taking private property for public use without "just compensation." The FAA is arguing the slots are an "operating privelege," not a property right, but the airlines are not accepting that - just as they did not when fighting an FAA porposal in 2008 to require slot auctions for all three major New York-area airports.
Under FAA-proposed conditions for the slot swap, Delta and US AIrways would have to relinquish their slots to the government if not sold within 60 days; Delta, US Airways and Continental all object. But Delta and US Airways take their argument a step further: They say they cannot get "just compensation" if the bidding is limited to certain carriers, and if those carriers know they can low-ball bids because Delta and US Airways stand to lose the slots in 60 days.
The second prong is to offer the FAA an alternative. TO that end, just as time was about to expire on the March 22 deadline for filing comments on the FAA's tentative decision, Delta and US Airways revealed thast they had signaled conditional deals to sell some slots to four low-cost carriers.
Under the slot-swap side deals, Delta would sell 4.5 National slots pairs to U.S. carrier JetBlue Airways. At LaGuardia, US Airways would sell five slot pairs apiece to AirTran Airways and Spirit Airlines and Canadian carrier WestJet.
AirTran, JetBlue, Spirit and WestJet joined Delta and US Airways in calling on the FAA to approve the plan.
Notable absent from those side deals was Southwest, which wants to expand beyond its limited service at LaGuardia but complains it has been unable to find slots at an economically sustainable price; Southwest also is interested in slots at National. As the country's largest low-cost carrier by far, its opposition could be influential.
Southwest blased Delta and US Airways for trying to "hand-select" and limit the size of their LaGuardia and National competition, and it wants the FAA to do even more than it proposed. The FAA, it argues, should require US Airways to sell at least 40 slot pairs at LaGuarida, and Delta at least 20 at National, to the highest bidder in an open, transparent, all-cash auction. Anything less in slot divestiture, it maintains, would not be sufficient for carriers to offer enough frequencies or markets to create "effective" low-fare competition.
It seems certain those conditions would kill the deal. But Southwest has made it clear it would be OK with that result too."
The End.
---
Delta Air Lines and US Airways are making a last-ditch effort to save a slot swap that would give Delta a dominant prescence at New York's LaGuardia Airport and US Airways the same at Reagan Washington National Airport. In the process, the carriers are simultaneously challenging the FAA and offering to partially accomodate it; pitting four U.S. and Canadian low-cost carriers against the biggest U.S. low-cost carrier, Southwest Airlines; and again raising the larger question of who actually owns takeoff and landing slots at U.S. slot-controlled airports
---
The FAA agress there would be public benefits from the deal - notably plans by both carriers to use bigger jets and the expansion and preservation of services to small communities. The rub came in its conclusion that the slow swap, if approved withou conditions, would be too harmful to fare-lowering competition.
---
After explaining what the FAA is demanding:
Delta and US Airways call those conditions a deal-braker, but they are trying to salvage it with what appears to be a two-pronged strategy. One prong is to question the legality of the proposed conditions - and warn the FAA it might be facing a court battle if it does not eliminate them. Delta and US Airways have some support: United and Continental airlines also filed comments challenging the FAA's authority.
One argument all of them make is that the law only gives the FAA the authority to promote safe and efficient use of airspace, not to assess and address impacts on competition, which, the airlines say, is primarily the purview of the Justice Department and, to a lesser extent, the Transportation secretary- who is a straight up ***.
Whoops. FTB add something there. Sorry about that. ^^ should just say "the Transportation secretary."
The Justice Department did not object to the slot swap, but on March 24 it filed comments supporting the FAA's tentative decision to make the slot divestiture a condition of FAA approval.
Another point, as argued by Delta, US Airways and Continental, is that the conditions would violate the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment protection against the government taking private property for public use without "just compensation." The FAA is arguing the slots are an "operating privelege," not a property right, but the airlines are not accepting that - just as they did not when fighting an FAA porposal in 2008 to require slot auctions for all three major New York-area airports.
Under FAA-proposed conditions for the slot swap, Delta and US AIrways would have to relinquish their slots to the government if not sold within 60 days; Delta, US Airways and Continental all object. But Delta and US Airways take their argument a step further: They say they cannot get "just compensation" if the bidding is limited to certain carriers, and if those carriers know they can low-ball bids because Delta and US Airways stand to lose the slots in 60 days.
The second prong is to offer the FAA an alternative. TO that end, just as time was about to expire on the March 22 deadline for filing comments on the FAA's tentative decision, Delta and US Airways revealed thast they had signaled conditional deals to sell some slots to four low-cost carriers.
Under the slot-swap side deals, Delta would sell 4.5 National slots pairs to U.S. carrier JetBlue Airways. At LaGuardia, US Airways would sell five slot pairs apiece to AirTran Airways and Spirit Airlines and Canadian carrier WestJet.
AirTran, JetBlue, Spirit and WestJet joined Delta and US Airways in calling on the FAA to approve the plan.
Notable absent from those side deals was Southwest, which wants to expand beyond its limited service at LaGuardia but complains it has been unable to find slots at an economically sustainable price; Southwest also is interested in slots at National. As the country's largest low-cost carrier by far, its opposition could be influential.
Southwest blased Delta and US Airways for trying to "hand-select" and limit the size of their LaGuardia and National competition, and it wants the FAA to do even more than it proposed. The FAA, it argues, should require US Airways to sell at least 40 slot pairs at LaGuarida, and Delta at least 20 at National, to the highest bidder in an open, transparent, all-cash auction. Anything less in slot divestiture, it maintains, would not be sufficient for carriers to offer enough frequencies or markets to create "effective" low-fare competition.
It seems certain those conditions would kill the deal. But Southwest has made it clear it would be OK with that result too."
The End.
04-04-2010, 08:30 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: A320 CA
Posts: 1,531
!!!! Look at those gas prices!
04-04-2010, 08:33 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: FO forever
Posts: 413
Hey enuff, nu and keen.
I've been thinking about the DTW 755/7ER bid packet and looking through it. One thing that comes to mind is that until recently, Delta was the airline that brought you 767-400s from ATL-LGA, MD-11s from ATL-JAX, B777s from ATL-MCO. If they did that to those planes, the 757 was nothing more than a work horse on par with the 727 with the ability to go far... if you wanted to do so. Hence the restructuring of our utilization gave us our massive overnight expansion without having to order a plane.
With the push to elliminate ATL 767 domestic and merge it into the ER category the ER guys are saying, imo, the same thing you are. What the heck? We are an international category, we do 2 leg 3-days and 4 leg 6-days, not 4 leg day trips that start at 0600. That's been a bitter pill for many of them to swallow.
I've been thinking about the DTW 755/7ER bid packet and looking through it. One thing that comes to mind is that until recently, Delta was the airline that brought you 767-400s from ATL-LGA, MD-11s from ATL-JAX, B777s from ATL-MCO. If they did that to those planes, the 757 was nothing more than a work horse on par with the 727 with the ability to go far... if you wanted to do so. Hence the restructuring of our utilization gave us our massive overnight expansion without having to order a plane.
With the push to elliminate ATL 767 domestic and merge it into the ER category the ER guys are saying, imo, the same thing you are. What the heck? We are an international category, we do 2 leg 3-days and 4 leg 6-days, not 4 leg day trips that start at 0600. That's been a bitter pill for many of them to swallow.
Bottom line is that I am for Max time for pay with min time at work. They can write rotations that are good for the pilots and cover the flying. Or, they can write rotations that are bad for pilots and cover the flying. As more of the airline commutes, commutable trips are also important.
Quality of life is very important especially if your are a family guy. You can have all the money in the world, but if you have no time at home to enjoy your family what good is it. Don't get me wrong here, I am for higher pay but QOL ranks right there with pay. Work rules and duty rigs are huge in terms of pilot jobs and QOL. I want the company to do great and I am prepared to do my part. In turn the company needs to do better in how they treat me. I am not just emp # __________. I want to be productive, go to work , fly my ass off, and go home. I want DAL to win because if they do I do.
So, being the new guys here how do we fix things like crappy rotations that don't work well for giving you a full month of flying or having to fly too many days in the month to get your time in. I may be wrong about this, but it appears that the south guys fly more days to get the same amount of flt time that the north guys got in fewer days. May not be the case, but the trend in posts and compalints seem to lean this way(I know that I am flying more days now). So I am for everyone to get their time in quicker.
Last edited by keenster; 04-04-2010 at 08:54 PM.
04-04-2010, 08:50 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: FO forever
Posts: 413
04-04-2010, 08:51 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Personally I don't want to see 5-day trips in ATL, or see many of them. Counting just GA residents there are over 2400 pilots here and 3550 seats in ATL. Although those 700 TX residents would probably like it.
However, if I was commuting then heck yeah I want 5-day trips. You've got about 500 Michigan resident pilots at Delta and 2013 seats in DTW alone.
NYC has about 300 pilots living in NY/NJ/CT and 1352 seats. They'd probably love up 5-day trips on the 737 there. But a lot of the 88 guys are BOS residents and now with the Airbus doing the shuttle and them getting qualed on the 90, I'm sure there will be a strong desire for more 5 day trips there too... on an Airbus base.
MSP has about 1585 seats and 1067 MN residents. Are they big into the 5-day trips there or is just a DTW thing?
However, if I was commuting then heck yeah I want 5-day trips. You've got about 500 Michigan resident pilots at Delta and 2013 seats in DTW alone.
NYC has about 300 pilots living in NY/NJ/CT and 1352 seats. They'd probably love up 5-day trips on the 737 there. But a lot of the 88 guys are BOS residents and now with the Airbus doing the shuttle and them getting qualed on the 90, I'm sure there will be a strong desire for more 5 day trips there too... on an Airbus base.
MSP has about 1585 seats and 1067 MN residents. Are they big into the 5-day trips there or is just a DTW thing?
04-04-2010, 08:54 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
I've never sat on an ejection seat but it must be interesting to rely on something that can save your life if it doesn't kill you first.
---
Hey, I found one for you...
04-04-2010, 09:01 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: FO forever
Posts: 413
Was it because the left gear wouldn't come down? If so, you might have been flying with a CA I flew with not too long ago that bailed out of a T38 too.
I've never sat on an ejection seat but it must be interesting to rely on something that can save your life if it doesn't kill you first.
---
Hey, I found one for you...
I've never sat on an ejection seat but it must be interesting to rely on something that can save your life if it doesn't kill you first.
---
Hey, I found one for you...
04-04-2010, 09:18 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,357
If I may turn your question around, before we pull out those threads sink made with what we want for C2012, but lets say nothing changed in the contract in C2012 but the pay rates. Same workrules, same scope language, same 23K, everything.
What then would you 1) demand for pay increase, what do you think you could 2) get, what would 3) settle for?
Now, how much would you be willing to give up for... whatever?
What then would you 1) demand for pay increase, what do you think you could 2) get, what would 3) settle for?
Now, how much would you be willing to give up for... whatever?
B777 Captain $317/hr
B737 Captain $226/hr
Rates for these two aircraft when the current contract expires in 2012:
B777 Captain $225.75/hr
B737 Captain $181.20/hr
The B777 pay would have to increase aprox 41% to hit the old number (not adjusted for inflation).
The B737 pay would have to increase aprox 25% to hit the old number (not adjusted for inflation).
When you add inflation averaged at 3% over 8 years (65% and 49% increases respectively for the two aircraft below) then the pay would need to be as follows to match the 2004 pay rate.
B777 Captain $393/hr
B737 Captain $280/hr
Now that we have 747-400 in the fleet we could also take the top pay of 2004 for United contract 2000 that Delta pay rates were based on. To get the same pay, based on inflation from 2004 to present pay would be as follows.
B747-400 Captain $440/hr
Also don't forget International override at $8/per hour. Night override $15/hr
With that said I think a higher number than my earlier 30% over three years is appropriate. If no work rules were changed as you suggested for the sake of discussion, yet even a higher number would be in order.
Its going to take some serious negotiating/solidarity to get anywhere near those numbers and certainly Moak out of the equation.
Last edited by Jack Bauer; 04-04-2010 at 09:28 PM.
04-04-2010, 09:20 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
04-05-2010, 02:44 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,919
Aviation Week had a good article this week on the slot swap. I can't link it but I'll rewrite a good section with in it.
---
Delta Air Lines and US Airways are making a last-ditch effort to save a slot swap that would give Delta a dominant prescence at New York's LaGuardia Airport and US Airways the same at Reagan Washington National Airport. In the process, the carriers are simultaneously challenging the FAA and offering to partially accomodate it; pitting four U.S. and Canadian low-cost carriers against the biggest U.S. low-cost carrier, Southwest Airlines; and again raising the larger question of who actually owns takeoff and landing slots at U.S. slot-controlled airports
---
The FAA agress there would be public benefits from the deal - notably plans by both carriers to use bigger jets and the expansion and preservation of services to small communities. The rub came in its conclusion that the slow swap, if approved withou conditions, would be too harmful to fare-lowering competition.
---
After explaining what the FAA is demanding:
Delta and US Airways call those conditions a deal-braker, but they are trying to salvage it with what appears to be a two-pronged strategy. One prong is to question the legality of the proposed conditions - and warn the FAA it might be facing a court battle if it does not eliminate them. Delta and US Airways have some support: United and Continental airlines also filed comments challenging the FAA's authority.
One argument all of them make is that the law only gives the FAA the authority to promote safe and efficient use of airspace, not to assess and address impacts on competition, which, the airlines say, is primarily the purview of the Justice Department and, to a lesser extent, the Transportation secretary- who is a straight up ***.
Whoops. FTB add something there. Sorry about that. ^^ should just say "the Transportation secretary."
The Justice Department did not object to the slot swap, but on March 24 it filed comments supporting the FAA's tentative decision to make the slot divestiture a condition of FAA approval.
Another point, as argued by Delta, US Airways and Continental, is that the conditions would violate the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment protection against the government taking private property for public use without "just compensation." The FAA is arguing the slots are an "operating privelege," not a property right, but the airlines are not accepting that - just as they did not when fighting an FAA porposal in 2008 to require slot auctions for all three major New York-area airports.
Under FAA-proposed conditions for the slot swap, Delta and US AIrways would have to relinquish their slots to the government if not sold within 60 days; Delta, US Airways and Continental all object. But Delta and US Airways take their argument a step further: They say they cannot get "just compensation" if the bidding is limited to certain carriers, and if those carriers know they can low-ball bids because Delta and US Airways stand to lose the slots in 60 days.
The second prong is to offer the FAA an alternative. TO that end, just as time was about to expire on the March 22 deadline for filing comments on the FAA's tentative decision, Delta and US Airways revealed thast they had signaled conditional deals to sell some slots to four low-cost carriers.
Under the slot-swap side deals, Delta would sell 4.5 National slots pairs to U.S. carrier JetBlue Airways. At LaGuardia, US Airways would sell five slot pairs apiece to AirTran Airways and Spirit Airlines and Canadian carrier WestJet.
AirTran, JetBlue, Spirit and WestJet joined Delta and US Airways in calling on the FAA to approve the plan.
Notable absent from those side deals was Southwest, which wants to expand beyond its limited service at LaGuardia but complains it has been unable to find slots at an economically sustainable price; Southwest also is interested in slots at National. As the country's largest low-cost carrier by far, its opposition could be influential.
Southwest blased Delta and US Airways for trying to "hand-select" and limit the size of their LaGuardia and National competition, and it wants the FAA to do even more than it proposed. The FAA, it argues, should require US Airways to sell at least 40 slot pairs at LaGuarida, and Delta at least 20 at National, to the highest bidder in an open, transparent, all-cash auction. Anything less in slot divestiture, it maintains, would not be sufficient for carriers to offer enough frequencies or markets to create "effective" low-fare competition.
It seems certain those conditions would kill the deal. But Southwest has made it clear it would be OK with that result too."
The End.
---
Delta Air Lines and US Airways are making a last-ditch effort to save a slot swap that would give Delta a dominant prescence at New York's LaGuardia Airport and US Airways the same at Reagan Washington National Airport. In the process, the carriers are simultaneously challenging the FAA and offering to partially accomodate it; pitting four U.S. and Canadian low-cost carriers against the biggest U.S. low-cost carrier, Southwest Airlines; and again raising the larger question of who actually owns takeoff and landing slots at U.S. slot-controlled airports
---
The FAA agress there would be public benefits from the deal - notably plans by both carriers to use bigger jets and the expansion and preservation of services to small communities. The rub came in its conclusion that the slow swap, if approved withou conditions, would be too harmful to fare-lowering competition.
---
After explaining what the FAA is demanding:
Delta and US Airways call those conditions a deal-braker, but they are trying to salvage it with what appears to be a two-pronged strategy. One prong is to question the legality of the proposed conditions - and warn the FAA it might be facing a court battle if it does not eliminate them. Delta and US Airways have some support: United and Continental airlines also filed comments challenging the FAA's authority.
One argument all of them make is that the law only gives the FAA the authority to promote safe and efficient use of airspace, not to assess and address impacts on competition, which, the airlines say, is primarily the purview of the Justice Department and, to a lesser extent, the Transportation secretary- who is a straight up ***.
Whoops. FTB add something there. Sorry about that. ^^ should just say "the Transportation secretary."
The Justice Department did not object to the slot swap, but on March 24 it filed comments supporting the FAA's tentative decision to make the slot divestiture a condition of FAA approval.
Another point, as argued by Delta, US Airways and Continental, is that the conditions would violate the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment protection against the government taking private property for public use without "just compensation." The FAA is arguing the slots are an "operating privelege," not a property right, but the airlines are not accepting that - just as they did not when fighting an FAA porposal in 2008 to require slot auctions for all three major New York-area airports.
Under FAA-proposed conditions for the slot swap, Delta and US AIrways would have to relinquish their slots to the government if not sold within 60 days; Delta, US Airways and Continental all object. But Delta and US Airways take their argument a step further: They say they cannot get "just compensation" if the bidding is limited to certain carriers, and if those carriers know they can low-ball bids because Delta and US Airways stand to lose the slots in 60 days.
The second prong is to offer the FAA an alternative. TO that end, just as time was about to expire on the March 22 deadline for filing comments on the FAA's tentative decision, Delta and US Airways revealed thast they had signaled conditional deals to sell some slots to four low-cost carriers.
Under the slot-swap side deals, Delta would sell 4.5 National slots pairs to U.S. carrier JetBlue Airways. At LaGuardia, US Airways would sell five slot pairs apiece to AirTran Airways and Spirit Airlines and Canadian carrier WestJet.
AirTran, JetBlue, Spirit and WestJet joined Delta and US Airways in calling on the FAA to approve the plan.
Notable absent from those side deals was Southwest, which wants to expand beyond its limited service at LaGuardia but complains it has been unable to find slots at an economically sustainable price; Southwest also is interested in slots at National. As the country's largest low-cost carrier by far, its opposition could be influential.
Southwest blased Delta and US Airways for trying to "hand-select" and limit the size of their LaGuardia and National competition, and it wants the FAA to do even more than it proposed. The FAA, it argues, should require US Airways to sell at least 40 slot pairs at LaGuarida, and Delta at least 20 at National, to the highest bidder in an open, transparent, all-cash auction. Anything less in slot divestiture, it maintains, would not be sufficient for carriers to offer enough frequencies or markets to create "effective" low-fare competition.
It seems certain those conditions would kill the deal. But Southwest has made it clear it would be OK with that result too."
The End.
If the FAA and DOT were so "overly" concerned about competitive antitrust issues, they wouldn't be so upset about the most profitable Airline Company over the last 10-15 years not getting more slots at LGA and DCA.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
