Search

Notices

JV Scope.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-09-2016, 08:04 AM
  #101  
Gets Weekends Off
 
notEnuf's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Position: stake holder ir.delta.com
Posts: 10,459
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
There is no narrow body planned that can fly Chigago Rome with any degree of reliability. What Delta has been doing is upsizing the fleet going to Europe. In order to get a acceptable seat mile cost across the pond with a narrow body it has to be no frills with high density seating. Delta is going in the opposite direction. A few years ago in AMS you could look down the terminal and see half a dozen 767's with 218 seats and even a 757 or two. Been there lately?
The MAX 10 if they build it still won't have the range of a 757 with winglets. You also overlook the problem with gate availability and capacity at many of the airports. That's only going to get worse, in fact it's predicted to become a critical issue in transatlantic air travel within 10 years. JFK and EWR are maxed out already in the international departure window.
And moving VA capacity out of Asia and into the trans Atlantic.
notEnuf is offline  
Old 09-09-2016, 08:08 AM
  #102  
Gets Weekends Off
 
notEnuf's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Position: stake holder ir.delta.com
Posts: 10,459
Default

Originally Posted by Trip7
JV Scope is the most misunderstood contract item. The AF/KLM JV is an emotional topic for many but when you sit down an analytically look at the scope of Delta international flying very little if any damage was done to Delta pilots. That's why the payout was so small.

The AF/KLM JV provides European theatre protection outside of the UK. The company agreed to a baseline that was above what they were currently flying. European markets took a dive and the company smartly and rightfully added flying to Latin Amerand the Pacific instead. Sure the European flying baseline was never met. But on a global scale the impact to pilot jobs was minor.

In conclusion, some common sense and reason need to be taken with this issue. Set a baseline for theatre protection flying that protects jobs but also gives the company flexibility to move jets where the money is. Let Global protection language in the Virgin JV agreement supercede any theatre protection. This should not be an problem for pilots unless you just want to layover in Europe no matter what the profitability is.

Global Protection Trumps Theatre Protection
When it came out, the MEC chair said it was a large settlement. Most value ever negotiated were his words if I recall correctly. More shaping history.
notEnuf is offline  
Old 09-09-2016, 09:17 AM
  #103  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 360
Default

Originally Posted by Trip7
JV Scope is the most misunderstood contract item. The AF/KLM JV is an emotional topic for many but when you sit down an analytically look at the scope of Delta international flying very little if any damage was done to Delta pilots. That's why the payout was so small.

The AF/KLM JV provides European theatre protection outside of the UK. The company agreed to a baseline that was above what they were currently flying. European markets took a dive and the company smartly and rightfully added flying to Latin Amerand the Pacific instead. Sure the European flying baseline was never met. But on a global scale the impact to pilot jobs was minor.

In conclusion, some common sense and reason need to be taken with this issue. Set a baseline for theatre protection flying that protects jobs but also gives the company flexibility to move jets where the money is. Let Global protection language in the Virgin JV agreement supercede any theatre protection. This should not be an problem for pilots unless you just want to layover in Europe no matter what the profitability is.

Global Protection Trumps Theatre Protection
I notice you like to use superlatives to make a weak or sometimes outright false argument sound more valid.

I will agree with your last sentence. We do need to think more globally when it comes to JV protections.

But your assertion that we simply shifted the European theater flying to areas such as LA is misleading at best. Much of our LA flying is on 737 or smaller ac. While I welcome any additional flying by Delta, this is not an equal redistribution from the widebody jobs that we're talking about when it comes to the Euro and Asian theatre JVs. Additionally, I believe the additional LA flying was a result of our fallout with Alaskan, not the global production balance that you assert.

So I guess I agree with your post's first sentence as well.
trustbutverify is offline  
Old 09-09-2016, 09:35 AM
  #104  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Vikz09's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: M88 B
Posts: 399
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
They would have to change the twin aisle protections. Why are they not asking?
Ok, what are our twin aisle protections and how would that change our scope protections under managements scope change desires. Perhaps there is something i haven't seen but on the service management wants this for a reason. They are hell bent on keeping costs below 2 percent. I imagine that differs alot from our minimum proposal. Management has to make this up somehow! Agreed?
Vikz09 is offline  
Old 09-09-2016, 10:26 AM
  #105  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,606
Default

Originally Posted by notEnuf
And moving VA capacity out of Asia and into the trans Atlantic.
What has our flying to the UK done since the purchase?
sailingfun is offline  
Old 09-09-2016, 10:28 AM
  #106  
Gets Weekends Off
 
notEnuf's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Position: stake holder ir.delta.com
Posts: 10,459
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
What has our flying to the UK done since the purchase?
Competed against our subsidiary, who has larger and newer aircraft, in a JV production balance agreement that allowed VA to expand over their existing level of production.
notEnuf is offline  
Old 09-09-2016, 10:34 AM
  #107  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,606
Default

Originally Posted by Vikz09
Ok, what are our twin aisle protections and how would that change our scope protections under managements scope change desires. Perhaps there is something i haven't seen but on the service management wants this for a reason. They are hell bent on keeping costs below 2 percent. I imagine that differs alot from our minimum proposal. Management has to make this up somehow! Agreed?
Yep, bigger airplanes provide lower costs per seat mile. That is why they are upguaging Europe. In the end they will fly what is most profitable. You won't find anyone thinking the 737 across the pond is the airframe of the future. Common sense generally prevails even with management. Scope is all on the Dalpa website including quarterly compliance data. Interesting reading.
sailingfun is offline  
Old 09-09-2016, 10:35 AM
  #108  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,606
Default

Originally Posted by notEnuf
Competed against our subsidiary, who has larger and newer aircraft, in a JV production balance agreement that allowed VA to expand over their existing level of production.
Our flying was up 23% in the last posted numbers. We took slots from VA to do it.
sailingfun is offline  
Old 09-09-2016, 10:44 AM
  #109  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
JamesBond's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2015
Position: A350 Both
Posts: 7,292
Default

Originally Posted by notEnuf
Competed against our subsidiary, who has larger and newer aircraft, in a JV production balance agreement that allowed VA to expand over their existing level of production.
Source this "information" please. Or is it just more hyperbole?
JamesBond is offline  
Old 09-09-2016, 10:53 AM
  #110  
Gets Weekends Off
 
notEnuf's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Position: stake holder ir.delta.com
Posts: 10,459
Default

Originally Posted by JamesBond
Source this "information" please. Or is it just more hyperbole?
Says the guy who never sources to the guy that always posts links. Its in the scope report you sighted.

What will happen to our flying? Have you seen the fall Atlantic pull down? Have you seen the production margin still available before VA flying triggers more production on our side? This is possibly worse than AF/KLM because we poorly negotiated production levels so there will be no violation or settlement.
notEnuf is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
TANSTAAFL
Major
79
03-09-2011 04:50 PM
yamahas3
Major
27
02-12-2011 06:41 AM
Beagle Pilot
Major
76
05-06-2010 07:18 AM
AAflyer
Major
101
03-27-2010 06:39 AM
Freighter Captain
Cargo
1
09-28-2005 05:40 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices