Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
06-14-2009, 06:18 AM
#8401
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,576
At Northwest our contract stated 50/50 with Klm, which I thought was fair for both. Did Dalpa give this away??
06-14-2009, 06:27 AM
#8402
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
I do not know. It is a new agreement, and the DAL-KLM-AF JV has a ton of it blacked out as it is protected information. I am sure that union has that info, but they would be under a fairly strict NDA on the subject. In effect disclosing "trade secret" information is considered insider trading, and corporate espionage.
The money is 50-50 so I guess you can make any assumptions off of that. I can tell you that that if DAL does not give up any profit from having KLM operate said flights, there is no reason for them to not outsource that flying.
Just my thoughts---this is becoming a standard disclaimer.
The money is 50-50 so I guess you can make any assumptions off of that. I can tell you that that if DAL does not give up any profit from having KLM operate said flights, there is no reason for them to not outsource that flying.
Just my thoughts---this is becoming a standard disclaimer.
06-14-2009, 06:44 AM
#8403
Looking for a laugh
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,099
Not trying to be pedantic, but what he said was in response to a question about MD-90s:
Maddogman (Jun 10, 2009 1:27:13 PM)
Hi Steve, It was posted on DeltaNet a couple of days ago that Delta had purchased an additional MD-90. Rumor has it that there are at least two more scheduled to join the fleet. Why are we investing in an aircraft that history has shown has less than desirable reliability?
Steve Gorman (Jun 10, 2009 1:27:13 PM)
The rumor mill is alive and well. We've been working on securing two add'l MD90s from the same operator that the first came from. One of the reasons the MD90s are viewed as an unreliable aircraft is because we have had only 16 in our fleet. From an operations perspective, we either need to have more of them or none of them. They fit a need in the seat range for our network and with the prices we're able to get them at, it's a smart choice. We continue to work on adding more to get to the right sized narrow-body fleet which is somewhere between 40 and 50 aircraft.(Bold Italics are mine.)
I think what he was saying is that they eventually would like to have 40 to 50 MD-90s, not that that is what we are getting in the near term.
06-14-2009, 09:13 AM
#8404
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,619
4. The amount of flying subject to the AF JV flown by each partner will be determined from a summer season baseline period commencing in the summer season immediately preceding the full implementation date. All growth ASMs flown above the baseline figure by the partners will be aggregated and shared between the partners on a 50/50 basis, subject to Section 1 P. 5.
1 P. 5.
5. Compliance will be measured for each summer season period, commencing at the end of the first summer season following full implementation. If the Company’s share of the AF JV growth ASMs above the baseline is at least 47% for the applicable summer season period, the Company will be deemed in compliance with the growth ASM measurement.
06-14-2009, 09:41 AM
#8405
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: The Beginnings
Posts: 1,317
Anecdotally, I'm a junior reserve 88 FO and have averaged about 35 hours a month for the past 3 months, at least. I've broken 70 one time in the past year.
Not exactly getting worked to death, myself.
06-14-2009, 10:47 AM
#8406
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Dismayed
Posts: 1,598
I broke guarantee last month and will this month as well. Got called for an IA early in the month and on my current 6 day avail period have been flown every day.
Good news is the planes are packed. I'm convinced we're giving the seats away.
06-14-2009, 11:29 AM
#8408
veut gagner ŕ la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Does anyone have the yield numbers for June? I'd be curious to know. The flights were packed this weekend, albeit thanks to some weather too. A lot of HKs and HK1s on the non-rev lists. I was about to go for a CRJ-900 flight with 21 open seats when they swapped it for a CRJ-200 a few hours prior and it went to -5.
06-14-2009, 11:46 AM
#8409
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Posts: 296
Please correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't the North vs South furlough clause only come into play if DAL parks a whole fleet of airplanes? Was this not specifically put in there because of our big fear of the 35 yr old DC-9 and $150 oil. Now the -9 is $$ and as long as oil stays around where it is now and our mgmt continues to hedge down here, then the -9 will continue to fly. I would think mgmt knows that if they disproportionatly F from from the N side then it would put a strain on the -9 training dept just as it would the 88 training dept if the opposite occurred. From what I've been seeing and hearing from fleet planning is that they want the right size a/c on the route, period. If a F is coming we collectively will get clipped. IMO of course.
06-14-2009, 11:54 AM
#8410
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Posts: 296
Just curious to some of you that seem to have good info, is there been any talk of using tools to mitigate a furlough? Such as lowering block time, temporary LOAs, etc... It just seems expensive to furlough 150-200 guys for the fall, giving the cost of the flow-down to cpz.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
