notEnuf

Per SD and the ATL base visit video on Deltanet, we're good. No new additions to the wide-body fleet count makes me realize there will be no change in the number of pilots getting top end pay rates.

Add to that, the planned transition to make international revenue 40% of total revenue and it becomes obvious the plan is and will continue to be dependence on partner operations to support Delta ticket sales.



The growth opportunity is clearly explained to be in international, however we are not increasing our international fleet size. See the ATL base visit video dated 4/6 and the JP Morgan presentation about capital expenditures planned for the future. THERE WILL BE NO WIDE-BODY GROWTH. We will continue to lag the industry in gauge and percentage of top level paying jobs. This is why we need to retain all of our profit sharing.

WhatNow

At the road show I attended they stated they had 55 A330/A350's on order. 40 will be delivered by the end of 2019 replacing 8 747 airframes in use plus a spare. Are they now putting out something different?
They did say they don't need to purchase additional widebodies until they start retiring 7er's in the 2021 timeframe.

roadrunner65

They already showed their hand last summer in TA15. They want an intl alter ego carrier and more codeshares and JV's. We MUST NOT allow one inch of give on any of this. They'd have us all domestic feed if they could get away with it. Every survey I've taken since C2012, I have listed intl scope as my #1 priority, this is the biggest threat to our careers.

Timbo

Yup, and that's also why they wanted to change our JV metric to "Block Hours" instead of continuing to use equivalent Seat/Kilometers. As we park our 747's our international seat count will be reduced, which will require the company to add more international flights to keep inside the balance, which they are already outside of.

Under a Block Hour measuring system, they could simply put another 757 on BOS-DUB and call it even, because an hour in a 757 would be 'equal' to one of our JV partner's hour in one of their 74's or A330's.

When it comes contract negotiation time, nothing the company asks for is by chance. There is a real reason behind every little give they are asking for, even though they will try to convince us it's not that big a deal, you can bet they have a bean counter who's job it is to cost out that change, and it's going to benefit them, not us.

Whether that's a change to our profit sharing, or change to block hours JV metric, or change to reserve call out rules, etc. you can bet they KNOW exactly how much that will save them, and cost us. Just look at all the concessions they wanted to slip by us in that last TA, from the IOE trip drops for 75% of the IOE trips, to the sick leave, to the JV block hours, it all adds up to less pilots required, and/or less money paid to the remaining pilots.

JamesBond

Or come up with a rational method of compensation that takes this into account.

JamesBond

Except that our 757s will be retired sooner rather than later as will their 747s. That leaves the 330 as the common airframe. They have more 777s (and could buy more I guess but the financials don't necessarily agree with that premise) and until the 380s die they have a given number. Given that logic, block hours make perfect sense. (The problem with the failed TA in this respect was the immediate capitulation of several percentage points of that flying. Had it taken a snapshot and made that the absolute floor, it would have been acceptable) If you believe that their 747s will last forever and that they will buy more 380s, then EASKs make more sense. The 747-800 is a dismal failure, and the 380s aren't selling to anyone but the ME3. Two engine airplanes are the present and future. The evidence is glaring.

The question you have to ask yourself is how many more 777s do you see for us? How many 350s, and how much will they pay relative to the 777s will we have in a reasonable timeframe? 5 years from now to have a sizeable fleet isn't a reasonable timeframe, imho to factor it into a new contract. Our 777 fleet is not a sizeable fleet, and in my opinion will never be. The 747 is dead. RIP

scambo1

Not.

We dont make fleet decisions and apparently have little control as to whom the company outsources. The company shows minimal signs of international in-sourcing and clear signs of down gauging. We must protect our flying and easks do that far more effectively than BHs.

Youd have us look the other way while we look for etops 737s and A321s. Oh joy.

JamesBond

How on God's green earth did you get that out of my post?

scambo1

Because you defend block hours which supports a downgauge.

JamesBond

But you just said that we have no control of what the company buys. We are buying no heavy airplanes bigger than the 330. The 747s are dead. The 777s are probably maxed out. Our biggest fleet is getting smaller. (And YOU JUST SAID, a management decision). I do not advocate support of a downgauge, I propose leveraging what we can in that regard because, again as you just said, we do not control what the company buys.

The bottom line is this: 330s are bigger than 757s. That means more EASKs on OUR side of the fence, and as their 747s die, since the 330 is smaller, fewer on theirs. Do the math.