Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
12-14-2010, 03:45 PM
Banned
Joined APC: Apr 2010
Posts: 394
Bar and I have discussed these data points many times over the last few years.
I could be mistaken but I beleive his point is that Pay is great and we all want it, but we need to realize that the issue of our aging fleet. Delta literally will need to spend tens of billions of dollars on jets in the next few years.
I suspect that he will further state that DAL will use this cost of new jets as a reason to outsource smaller flying because they cannot add that amount of debt to the balance sheet.
Every time we have discussed this prior it has never been my opinion that he feels we need to make less pay to make sure DAL can afford these jets. It is more of a point that DAL will make that, given our pay, etc, they cannot afford to renew the fleet under the current umbrella.
I could be mistaken but I beleive his point is that Pay is great and we all want it, but we need to realize that the issue of our aging fleet. Delta literally will need to spend tens of billions of dollars on jets in the next few years.
I suspect that he will further state that DAL will use this cost of new jets as a reason to outsource smaller flying because they cannot add that amount of debt to the balance sheet.
Every time we have discussed this prior it has never been my opinion that he feels we need to make less pay to make sure DAL can afford these jets. It is more of a point that DAL will make that, given our pay, etc, they cannot afford to renew the fleet under the current umbrella.
It is management's job to pay employees as little as possible.
It ain't the employee's job to help them do it.
12-14-2010, 03:57 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
12-14-2010, 04:09 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
Bar and I have discussed these data points many times over the last few years.
I could be mistaken but I beleive his point is that Pay is great and we all want it, but we need to realize that the issue of our aging fleet. Delta literally will need to spend tens of billions of dollars on jets in the next few years.
I suspect that he will further state that DAL will use this cost of new jets as a reason to outsource smaller flying because they cannot add that amount of debt to the balance sheet.
Every time we have discussed this prior it has never been my opinion that he feels we need to make less pay to make sure DAL can afford these jets. It is more of a point that DAL will make that, given our pay, etc, they cannot afford to renew the fleet under the current umbrella.
It is part of the reason why Scope is so important. It cannot be sold for anything.
I could be mistaken but I beleive his point is that Pay is great and we all want it, but we need to realize that the issue of our aging fleet. Delta literally will need to spend tens of billions of dollars on jets in the next few years.
I suspect that he will further state that DAL will use this cost of new jets as a reason to outsource smaller flying because they cannot add that amount of debt to the balance sheet.
Every time we have discussed this prior it has never been my opinion that he feels we need to make less pay to make sure DAL can afford these jets. It is more of a point that DAL will make that, given our pay, etc, they cannot afford to renew the fleet under the current umbrella.
It is part of the reason why Scope is so important. It cannot be sold for anything.
Acl,
I understand what you are saying. The company needs money for airplanes in the future. All I am saying is that I gave already.
1.) Take a 45% paycut to help the company buy airplanes for someone else: Done. Box checked.
2.) Allow someone else to fly above mentioned aircraft while you watch your fleet and flying shrink. Done. Box checked again.
My giving spirit is exhausted. Bah humbug. I want Santa to re-fill my stocking with pay and scope.
New K AKA Ebenezer Scrooge
12-14-2010, 04:41 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Urban chicken rancher.
Posts: 6,070
I've been wondering why on departure from DTW the controller always gives me a heading and then says "when able, direct Dunks." I think, don't they know I can go direct to Dunks right now? Don't they know I'm always able? Don't they know I fly the Fluff? Then I remember, ah, New K, he gets out his chainsaw. They don't know that I'm not New K....ahhh.
12-14-2010, 05:41 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Rosetta Stoned?
OK, so Bar has been wrong before, but his arguments always strike me as cogent, and usually worth a read. If he wonders how the company will pay for the renewal of the fleet, and therefore shows interest in the future of the business plan... good for him. I'm sure Bar may be overlooking some positive factors that would help bridge the gap he seems to be forecasting. It might actually be interesting to discuss those.
But instead of showing us how he might be incorrect, some have chosen to translate his words instead. He doesn't mean "I don't know how the company can pay for new airplanes": he actually is saying "I'm a gigantic [deleted] and I can't wait to willingly bend over and put RA's [deleted] in my [deleted]. I'll even [deleted] for him afterwards."
First, RTFP. Then, ATFP, if you can. But please don't TTFP.
But instead of showing us how he might be incorrect, some have chosen to translate his words instead. He doesn't mean "I don't know how the company can pay for new airplanes": he actually is saying "I'm a gigantic [deleted] and I can't wait to willingly bend over and put RA's [deleted] in my [deleted]. I'll even [deleted] for him afterwards."
First, RTFP. Then, ATFP, if you can. But please don't TTFP.
12-14-2010, 06:09 PM
Works Every Weekend
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 737 ATL
Posts: 3,506
12-14-2010, 06:16 PM
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: The Flying Wasp
Posts: 72
commutable trip.
If they notify you of a trip before 12 hours and you don't acknowledge the trip 3 hours prior you have to be 'promptly available' from original report until 6 hours after.
That is the big question, what is promptly available mean? according to scheduling that means you better be at the airport at that moment to work that flight...or else!
ALPA hotline disagrees and says that means " reasonable report aka 2 hrs ish"
BUT has anyone ignored the calls and at the trip sign in time answered and said, "Ill be there when I can" delayed the flight etc?
Would love to know, cause ALPA never followed up with the follow up in this case.
If they notify you of a trip before 12 hours and you don't acknowledge the trip 3 hours prior you have to be 'promptly available' from original report until 6 hours after.
That is the big question, what is promptly available mean? according to scheduling that means you better be at the airport at that moment to work that flight...or else!
ALPA hotline disagrees and says that means " reasonable report aka 2 hrs ish"
BUT has anyone ignored the calls and at the trip sign in time answered and said, "Ill be there when I can" delayed the flight etc?
Would love to know, cause ALPA never followed up with the follow up in this case.
12-14-2010, 06:35 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,038
When the time comes to replace those airframes as a general rule the new airframes are more efficient and should cover the cost of the replacement over time. Generating revenue to replace aircraft is a company function. If you take a look at the total cost of leasing and purchasing aircraft its not nearly as significant as fuel. The next generation of aircraft in the larger narrow aisle seat count may gain enough to actual be cheaper overall including the cost to purchase or lease. This will be especially true if fuel prices increase.
I am not sure what the issue is with 757 airframe life. Its the exact same tube as the 737. Same construction just longer. Fedex is buying lots of used 757's and plans on keeping them in service for 20 more years.
I am not sure what the issue is with 757 airframe life. Its the exact same tube as the 737. Same construction just longer. Fedex is buying lots of used 757's and plans on keeping them in service for 20 more years.
- FedEx typically runs their airplanes two cycles a day. They have very low utilization, which is why DC8's still survive in cargo service. Who cares what they cost to operate ... they don't operate that much and the margins are better than in the pax business
- Boeing designed the 757 for a 20 year life
- The FAA considers the service life of a 757 to be 50,000 cycles, the 737 is 75,000
- To continue in operation past the "service goals" the aircraft must go through heavy maintenance every 30 to 72 months. Economically, my understanding is that parks the airplane. More so on the Airbus A320 than the Boeing and more so on the 757 than the MD fleet although all have a 48,000 to 50,000 limit
- There are three parties at the table on the life extension programs. The operator, the manufacturer and the FAA. Two of the three would like to see new airplanes, only one wants to keep what they've got*
- Delta's 757's are the most efficient jets in the fleet. The 737's efficiency does not come anywhere near the 25% or higher improvement that would be needed to fund their replacement ... and a 737 can't do everything a 757 can do
- Skywest and Republic have been well managed and are in an excellent position to win a "survival of the fittest" contest to provide domestic flying under codeshare agreements. They are a real white paper player for the C Series, or equivalent, with no legacy overhead. With musical seniority lists and certificates, I mean no legacy overhead, not even their own.
- Operators like Southwest have replaced 737NG's with new 737's as they wear out. There is no efficiency payback.
- We are pretty much at the top of the efficiency curve. The improvements nowadays are much closer to the margin and do not come near as quickly.
- Cost to replace the 757 fleet with less capable 737's is approximately $14 Billion. Cost to do so with the 787 $31.5 Billion. Profits in 2010 if we are lucky around $1.25.
All I'm saying is there is a lot more to this than C2K pay rates and an arbitrary percentage. There are some very large economic forces which will exert pressure on management like they are the pebble holding the San Andreas fault together. On path to relief will likely be seen in the form of outsourcing the problem of capital expenditures. The problem is ALPA's reluctance to make the rapid changes necessary to view representation inclusively and build bridges across certificates. As an example I cite the only committee not to reach a consensus at this year's BOD.
* not necessarily true in Airbus' case since the French government owns a significant percentage of Air France. Boeing (Douglas) really has no incentive to support life extension programs if they believe it possible to sell new airplanes.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 12-14-2010 at 07:10 PM.
12-14-2010, 06:43 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: Starboard Side, weekends & holidays.
Posts: 856
Sailing, I agree management buys airplanes, we don't. But, management can also decide to tank the company without any harm to themselves while outsourcing our jobs, rinse, wash repeat. It seems we would have learned something from the last decade.
All I'm saying is there is a lot more to this than C2K pay rates and an arbitrary percentage. There are some very large economic forces which will exert pressure on management like they are the pebble holding the San Andreas fault together.
- FedEx typically runs their airplanes two cycles a day. They have very low utilization, which is why DC8's still survive in cargo service. Who cares what they cost to operate ... they don't operate that much and the margins are better than in the pax business
- Boeing designed the 757 for a 20 year life
- The FAA considers the service life of a 757 to be 50,000 cycles, the 737 is 75,000
- To continue in operation past the "service goals" the aircraft must go through heavy maintenance every 30 to 72 months. Economically, my understanding is that parks the airplane. More so on the Airbus A320 than the Boeing and more so on the 757 than the MD fleet although all have a 48,000 to 50,000 limit
- There are three parties at the table on the life extension programs. The operator, the manufacturer and the FAA. Two of the three would like to see new airplanes, only one wants to keep what they've got
- Delta's 757's are the most efficient jets in the fleet. The 737's efficiency does not come anywhere near the 25% or higher improvement that would be needed to fund their replacement ... and a 737 can't do everything a 757 can do
- Skywest and Republic have been well managed and are in an excellent position to win a "survival of the fittest" contest to provide domestic flying under codeshare agreements. They are a real white paper player for the C Series, or equivalent, with no legacy overhead. With musical seniority lists and certificates, I mean no legacy overhead, not even their own.
- Operators like Southwest have replaced 737NG's with new 737's as they wear out. There is no efficiency payback.
- We are pretty much at the top of the efficiency curve. The improvements nowadays are much closer to the margin and do not come near as quickly.
- Cost to replace the 757 fleet with less capable 737's is approximately $14 Billion. Cost to do so with the 787 $31.5 Billion. Profits in 2010 if we are lucky around $1.25.
All I'm saying is there is a lot more to this than C2K pay rates and an arbitrary percentage. There are some very large economic forces which will exert pressure on management like they are the pebble holding the San Andreas fault together.
12-14-2010, 07:05 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,038
... and since someone will claim I'm yelling "surrender" I'm not. Just saying to play the game smart. Part of the reason Hitler got his butt beat as badly as he did was he refused to even consider defensive strategies.
Management's got the strategic default play perfected. Have we developed our defensive position? A quick look through our playbook (our PWA, after several chances for Section 1 repairs and a few tweaks) is, nope.
I'm not saying we don't have good field position. Just pointing out four attempts at a hail mary and turn the ball over with no defense is ... ill considered. Just trying to interject a little balance before we get too excited about a 10% ' ish operating margin. For historical perspective, here's a little recap of United's 2000 contract from one historian:
Management's got the strategic default play perfected. Have we developed our defensive position? A quick look through our playbook (our PWA, after several chances for Section 1 repairs and a few tweaks) is, nope.
I'm not saying we don't have good field position. Just pointing out four attempts at a hail mary and turn the ball over with no defense is ... ill considered. Just trying to interject a little balance before we get too excited about a 10% ' ish operating margin. For historical perspective, here's a little recap of United's 2000 contract from one historian:
Originally Posted by Bill Swelbar
That made the scope clause important trading currency for pilot unions that agreed to relax scope protections only in return for improvements in other parts of the agreement. For example, when United pilots negotiated a new agreement in the Fall of 2000, the union leveraged scope relief to demand a weighted average 23 percent wage increase and two subsequent 4.7 percent increases, as well as a number of other contract enhancements that ultimately contributed to landing the carrier in bankruptcy.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 12-14-2010 at 08:49 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
