Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
08-18-2010, 02:01 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: bartender
Posts: 295
08-18-2010, 02:06 PM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Just checking, but didn't NWA nearly go bankrupt in 1993 AND go bankrupt in 2005?
Maybe all those gas guzzling DC-9's weren't as profitable as the "spin" you provide!
The RJ was disruptive technology. It didn't enter service until December, 1993. It ensured the demise of many mainline only cities, as other networks were able to connect to those cities where they couldn't with Saabs and DHC-8's. Delta has plenty of those examples as well (even the hometown of Monroe). We used to be the only game in town. It then got connected to IAH, DFW, and other hubs with ERJ's. That was the death of the 737/DC-9. Total seats are the same, just different networks flying them.
Maybe all those gas guzzling DC-9's weren't as profitable as the "spin" you provide!
The RJ was disruptive technology. It didn't enter service until December, 1993. It ensured the demise of many mainline only cities, as other networks were able to connect to those cities where they couldn't with Saabs and DHC-8's. Delta has plenty of those examples as well (even the hometown of Monroe). We used to be the only game in town. It then got connected to IAH, DFW, and other hubs with ERJ's. That was the death of the 737/DC-9. Total seats are the same, just different networks flying them.
I have no issue with market rates on them, I do not care if someone needs to start in the right seat of one. I am fairly certain that DAL would still have qualified pilots lining up to fly for DAL in one of those CRJ or E-Jet models. Why? If is a direct path to a 744/777 seat. No maybe, no interview, they are DAL pilots.
I have also never seen an airplane no matter how junior or how low the pay not have someone bid it. There will always be pilots in the seat, because that is the way the airline staffs it. It would not be a "B" rate, it would just be the "market" rate.
If we were to use the "profitability" measurement for mainline jets, heck nothing should be flying here!
As I have previously posted, the pilot group and MEC leadership really need to decide if going after that seat segment is what needs to be done now. Reality is half of this list will retire under the next PWA and it is simple to see that most want money are retirement dollars. I do not believe pilots want to sell flying for any gains, but to buy back this flying may not be high on the majority of our pilots priority lists. That is the ugly truth, it may not further unity, or the profession, but those appear to be the facts most of the 55+ guys I fly with see.
I also know that if there is a true push by the company for 77-120 seat flying for DCI, they have shown their hand. It proves that the current seat segment is dead and they need something to keep DCI going. If that happens this group and this corporation are at a crossroads. I personally do not see a huge push for it right now. If we are in contract talks in 2014-2015 that may change.
08-18-2010, 02:06 PM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
If a newhire is awarded MSP M88 but wants NYC M88, and bids and is awarded NYC M88 on the next AE does he take a freeze? I'm reading Sec 22 G bit having problems figuring it out. Help is appreciated. 
08-18-2010, 02:14 PM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
There is no freeze for a new base if the seat stays the same.
Bid M88 anywhere and he is fine. There is no longer a freeze for the MD-90 B qual.
Bid M88 anywhere and he is fine. There is no longer a freeze for the MD-90 B qual.
08-18-2010, 02:14 PM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
For example Johnso, you can bid ATL 320B on the Jan AE and not incur a freeze since you are currently qualified. 
08-18-2010, 02:23 PM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
08-18-2010, 02:23 PM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
Slow,
First off - Why so defensive of management? All I was saying is that there are plenty of routes that RJs were serving that could be served by mainline.
If you are asking me to explain why our management does what they do, you are asking quite a bit. I was simply responding to a previous post about RJ.s. Are you saying markets such as JFK-ORD can not support mainline service?
Finally, my guess as to why we are doing this is that there are a bunch of reasons:
In their RJ love-fest days management signed a bunch of long term contracts that are now binding. Also, we probably parked too many mainline jets and now don't have enough aircraft to serve these markets without RJs.
And finally let me ask you some questions - Why would management sign a deal where our connection carriers were making consistent profits at no risk and DAL was posting record loses?
Why would management buy COMAIR and ASA high and sell low?
Why are they always 180 out on fuel hedges?
Answer to all - They make mistakes. Are you inferring because our management does something it is correct? That they couldn't possibly be doing something now, that in hindsight will appear foolish? I guess you are saying if we are using RJs on these routes its the right, ie. correct, ie. the most profitable thing to do?
Scoop
First off - Why so defensive of management? All I was saying is that there are plenty of routes that RJs were serving that could be served by mainline.
If you are asking me to explain why our management does what they do, you are asking quite a bit. I was simply responding to a previous post about RJ.s. Are you saying markets such as JFK-ORD can not support mainline service?
Finally, my guess as to why we are doing this is that there are a bunch of reasons:
In their RJ love-fest days management signed a bunch of long term contracts that are now binding. Also, we probably parked too many mainline jets and now don't have enough aircraft to serve these markets without RJs.
And finally let me ask you some questions - Why would management sign a deal where our connection carriers were making consistent profits at no risk and DAL was posting record loses?
Why would management buy COMAIR and ASA high and sell low?
Why are they always 180 out on fuel hedges?
Answer to all - They make mistakes. Are you inferring because our management does something it is correct? That they couldn't possibly be doing something now, that in hindsight will appear foolish? I guess you are saying if we are using RJs on these routes its the right, ie. correct, ie. the most profitable thing to do?
Scoop
Thats called winning the debrief.
RJs lose business as much as they gain it IMO. DAL mgmt in the past has cancelled routes that always had full planes because there was no marginal growth.
Counting beans is not management. Metrics are important if they measure the right things.
RA's article in sky was vetted thru everyone. It said exactly what it meant to say. Meaning any interpretation you take away from the article was intentional.
08-18-2010, 02:31 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,907
Plenty of money was made with DC-9s after 1993, employing NWA pilots while DAL was outsourcing jet jobs as fast as RJs could be build...outsourcing that the DAL scope cause was wholly complicit in.
For two companies that wound up in the exact same place and the exact same date, at least NWA kept mainline guys on the payroll, rather than brankrolling others expantion. And had enough left over to save the pension...
Nu
08-18-2010, 02:34 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: bartender
Posts: 295
See imho part of the issue is what many think is mainline and what is not. I see the 70+ seat jets with two class configs and know that those are mainline jets.
I have no issue with market rates on them, I do not care if someone needs to start in the right seat of one. I am fairly certain that DAL would still have qualified pilots lining up to fly for DAL in one of those CRJ or E-Jet models. Why? If is a direct path to a 744/777 seat. No maybe, no interview, they are DAL pilots.
I have also never seen an airplane no matter how junior or how low the pay not have someone bid it. There will always be pilots in the seat, because that is the way the airline staffs it. It would not be a "B" rate, it would just be the "market" rate.
If we were to use the "profitability" measurement for mainline jets, heck nothing should be flying here!
As I have previously posted, the pilot group and MEC leadership really need to decide if going after that seat segment is what needs to be done now. Reality is half of this list will retire under the next PWA and it is simple to see that most want money are retirement dollars. I do not believe pilots want to sell flying for any gains, but to buy back this flying may not be high on the majority of our pilots priority lists. That is the ugly truth, it may not further unity, or the profession, but those appear to be the facts most of the 55+ guys I fly with see.
I also know that if there is a true push by the company for 77-120 seat flying for DCI, they have shown their hand. It proves that the current seat segment is dead and they need something to keep DCI going. If that happens this group and this corporation are at a crossroads. I personally do not see a huge push for it right now. If we are in contract talks in 2014-2015 that may change.
I have no issue with market rates on them, I do not care if someone needs to start in the right seat of one. I am fairly certain that DAL would still have qualified pilots lining up to fly for DAL in one of those CRJ or E-Jet models. Why? If is a direct path to a 744/777 seat. No maybe, no interview, they are DAL pilots.
I have also never seen an airplane no matter how junior or how low the pay not have someone bid it. There will always be pilots in the seat, because that is the way the airline staffs it. It would not be a "B" rate, it would just be the "market" rate.
If we were to use the "profitability" measurement for mainline jets, heck nothing should be flying here!
As I have previously posted, the pilot group and MEC leadership really need to decide if going after that seat segment is what needs to be done now. Reality is half of this list will retire under the next PWA and it is simple to see that most want money are retirement dollars. I do not believe pilots want to sell flying for any gains, but to buy back this flying may not be high on the majority of our pilots priority lists. That is the ugly truth, it may not further unity, or the profession, but those appear to be the facts most of the 55+ guys I fly with see.
I also know that if there is a true push by the company for 77-120 seat flying for DCI, they have shown their hand. It proves that the current seat segment is dead and they need something to keep DCI going. If that happens this group and this corporation are at a crossroads. I personally do not see a huge push for it right now. If we are in contract talks in 2014-2015 that may change.
08-18-2010, 02:40 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: bartender
Posts: 295
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
