Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
02-21-2012, 07:35 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,919
Just wondering.
02-21-2012, 07:56 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
02-21-2012, 07:57 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Interesting. What do you mean by "conniption"? Do you mean how they would react if we were to walk in with the SWA contract in hand and say "we demand this?" I would not call the reaction to that a "conniption". THe reaction would probably be something more akin to stifled laughter and quiet celebration in the knowledge that that ain't gonna happen, and then they would have us at BK wages and work rules for the forseeable future. See: AMR
02-21-2012, 08:02 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
Bar,
On a side note, it is impressive to see the progression at airlines that want to perform their own flying.
NKS has upgrades under five years
Emirates looks like they are going with Direct Entry Capt's
Hawaiian has grown their pilot group by over 25% in the last year
ALK has impressive growth numbers
I said a few weeks ago that DAL is trying to find how much they can shrink before their RASM starts to hit the back side of the power curve. Last month they still saw a 14% increase in RASM. I would say that they can shrink a little further as long as it does not effect the efficency of their hub network.
On a side note, it is impressive to see the progression at airlines that want to perform their own flying.
NKS has upgrades under five years
Emirates looks like they are going with Direct Entry Capt's
Hawaiian has grown their pilot group by over 25% in the last year
ALK has impressive growth numbers
I said a few weeks ago that DAL is trying to find how much they can shrink before their RASM starts to hit the back side of the power curve. Last month they still saw a 14% increase in RASM. I would say that they can shrink a little further as long as it does not effect the efficency of their hub network.
I'd submit we should maintain no less than V2+15. To climb requires excess airspeed.
I'll also submit that our next management team will be critical of this management team lack of interest in our airline.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 02-21-2012 at 08:20 AM.
02-21-2012, 08:04 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
02-21-2012, 08:27 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
02-21-2012, 08:30 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
There's disagreement, and then there's spewing an agenda. I've had enough of his propaganda. He and I made nice at one point, but then he fell back into name calling and all that other juvenile stuff, so I just don't have to read his drivel anymore. He has joined a very select club.
02-21-2012, 08:32 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
What the hell is going on with DAL stock today.... dayam!
02-21-2012, 08:33 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift
Posts: 1,724
FINALLY! Someone writes the correct question!!!!!
George, that is the question we need to ask when engineering scope language. Scope has to be built for disasters, knowing that economic duress will place our contract under stress. Just as buildings codes assume earthquakes, fires, floods and storm.
The much ballyhoo's Contract 2000 included a number of block hour ratio provisions, limits on the operation of DCI aircraft and competing aircraft. People forget that these scope provisions failed nearly immediately after Contract 2000 was in force. I've got to get out some old dusty notes, but I think we gave up what today we would call "production balance" within 60 days of the contract's effective date. Regardless of whether it was 60 days, or 600, we all know what happened; Delta went from 90+% of its departures to somewhere around 40%. I think we can agree that when tested by economic stress, our scope sustained a structural failure.
Next question ... "why'd we do that?"
Pilots need to understand why we outsource. We outsource our flying in the hope Delta will make more money, some portion of which will be paid to us. ALPA partners with management in outsourcing our work (and lets not kid ourselves, the DPA would do the same).
When times get tough, the Company needs more money, desperately. The last thing they'll do is sever their profitable outsourcing strategy. The union's history shows their agreement when the Company is in dire straights. They'll write "better to save all pilots rather than saving a few."
The model then falls into traps of greed and fear. In good times we want more money funded by outsourcing, in bad times we want to avoid the whole outfit going out of business. That is why we now shrink in good times and bad. We are decoupled from the real performance of our airline.
The only long term answer is unity. We must perform our own flying and take the ups and downs with our Company.
George, that is the question we need to ask when engineering scope language. Scope has to be built for disasters, knowing that economic duress will place our contract under stress. Just as buildings codes assume earthquakes, fires, floods and storm.
The much ballyhoo's Contract 2000 included a number of block hour ratio provisions, limits on the operation of DCI aircraft and competing aircraft. People forget that these scope provisions failed nearly immediately after Contract 2000 was in force. I've got to get out some old dusty notes, but I think we gave up what today we would call "production balance" within 60 days of the contract's effective date. Regardless of whether it was 60 days, or 600, we all know what happened; Delta went from 90+% of its departures to somewhere around 40%. I think we can agree that when tested by economic stress, our scope sustained a structural failure.
Next question ... "why'd we do that?"
Pilots need to understand why we outsource. We outsource our flying in the hope Delta will make more money, some portion of which will be paid to us. ALPA partners with management in outsourcing our work (and lets not kid ourselves, the DPA would do the same).
When times get tough, the Company needs more money, desperately. The last thing they'll do is sever their profitable outsourcing strategy. The union's history shows their agreement when the Company is in dire straights. They'll write "better to save all pilots rather than saving a few."
The model then falls into traps of greed and fear. In good times we want more money funded by outsourcing, in bad times we want to avoid the whole outfit going out of business. That is why we now shrink in good times and bad. We are decoupled from the real performance of our airline.
The only long term answer is unity. We must perform our own flying and take the ups and downs with our Company.
Cheers
George
02-21-2012, 08:34 AM
On Reserve
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: MSP7ERB
Posts: 1,886
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
