New Delta scope thread
02-26-2009, 12:15 PM
#52
Can't abide NAI
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
02-26-2009, 12:49 PM
#53
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,619
)There are many problems and it will be difficult. You think you can just wave a magic scope wand at this problem and it will go away. If you want to hide behind the "I'm just labor" excuse, fine, but don't expect any results. My guess is you just want to vent and "write your reps" and have someone else solve the problem. That's fine, but don't tar me with that label. Real solutions take real work.
Oh and by the way, AMR is getting rid of more MD-80's than they are getting replacements so your example is a bad one. They are shrinking mainline hulls this year. Lot's of guys retiring but not many getting recalled.
Last edited by alfaromeo; 02-26-2009 at 01:00 PM.
02-26-2009, 01:18 PM
#54
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
I can tell you this much. Bar is willing to work. Just ask him. He has a great skill set. I am willing to work on this issue. We have been dealing with it and trying to wrap our arms around it in one way or another for over a decade.
We have an opportunity here, CPZ is on our team. Put them on their own MEC you will in effect create OH. Keep them part of the team as a voting member of the MEC, and or part of our list you capture the E-series flying.
Republic Holdings is not ALPA so we will not have the same pitfalls as we would with another ALPA carrier. No other ALPA carrier flies the type. We do not have a conflict of interest with the Ford-Cooksey settlement. Now the CRJ-900 we do. But here is a true chance for a step forward.
We have an opportunity here, CPZ is on our team. Put them on their own MEC you will in effect create OH. Keep them part of the team as a voting member of the MEC, and or part of our list you capture the E-series flying.
Republic Holdings is not ALPA so we will not have the same pitfalls as we would with another ALPA carrier. No other ALPA carrier flies the type. We do not have a conflict of interest with the Ford-Cooksey settlement. Now the CRJ-900 we do. But here is a true chance for a step forward.
02-26-2009, 01:32 PM
#55
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
To me, this whole argument comes down to first officers who are not happy being first officers, they want to be captains. Understandable.
Some think the answer to this is scope. Have better scope and all those mainline jobs will come back. Nope. You can maybe get the RJ pilots to change uniforms and now are mainline pilots, but you won't get what you really want, which is hundreds of more big mainline airplanes (like 737's) to come back so you can make captain at 5 years. The only way to do that is to get Congress to pass a law to make RJ's illegal in the US. Lacking that, then you have to learn to live with these smaller jets.
The question then goes to who flies them. The first officers who are itchy for that fourth stripe probably don't want to be RJ captains because that would be a pay cut. They really don't want to be RJ first officers, for many they have already been there done that.
If you think that you can do this by being "tough" or "radical" or "hard line" then dream on. That is a bunch of self delusion by frustrated pilots that imagine themselves as the sun drenched gun fighter going off to slay management. Go read the Railway Labor Act and then come back and give me your "radical" theories. Who are the highest paid pilots now? Southwest, right? What a bunch of radicals. SWAPA does not even have a Strike Committee. Seems their measured, thinking approach has served their pilots pretty well.
Good luck with your hard lines and LEC resolutions. How about go develop a business plan for recapturing this flying and you will be much more successful. I know that will be a lot of work, might as well be you that does it.
Some think the answer to this is scope. Have better scope and all those mainline jobs will come back. Nope. You can maybe get the RJ pilots to change uniforms and now are mainline pilots, but you won't get what you really want, which is hundreds of more big mainline airplanes (like 737's) to come back so you can make captain at 5 years. The only way to do that is to get Congress to pass a law to make RJ's illegal in the US. Lacking that, then you have to learn to live with these smaller jets.
The question then goes to who flies them. The first officers who are itchy for that fourth stripe probably don't want to be RJ captains because that would be a pay cut. They really don't want to be RJ first officers, for many they have already been there done that.
If you think that you can do this by being "tough" or "radical" or "hard line" then dream on. That is a bunch of self delusion by frustrated pilots that imagine themselves as the sun drenched gun fighter going off to slay management. Go read the Railway Labor Act and then come back and give me your "radical" theories. Who are the highest paid pilots now? Southwest, right? What a bunch of radicals. SWAPA does not even have a Strike Committee. Seems their measured, thinking approach has served their pilots pretty well.
Good luck with your hard lines and LEC resolutions. How about go develop a business plan for recapturing this flying and you will be much more successful. I know that will be a lot of work, might as well be you that does it.
I think its clear with the resolutions that are being passed around that there is a plan and its coming together and I think you'll start seeing it all over the place shortly. The point is to go right up to DALPA and force the issue because as Bar said, Delta runs the airline, DALPA represents us, we want this issue discussed and not brushed aside by folks who missed the 50 seat RJ revolution over a decade ago and will miss this one as well if not pushed.
And as a side note, yes CAL does not have a 100 seat aircraft on order but they have a whole bunch of 114 seat 735s they got stuck with during their low times and they really hate them. Horrific CASMs. Turns out taking a 733 to a 735 is a real bad idea. In fact, buying any 100 seat version of a 150 seat plane is a bad idea and probably why DAL and NWA independent of each other turned to 76 seaters instead of to either Boeing or Airbus when it came to a small aircraft fleet. Neither Boeing or Airbus are coming out with a small jet, they still don't think anyone is going to order it, same thing they said a decade or more ago and now I think there have been 2000 or 2500 RJs built in less than 10 years. Thats the trend, thankfully junior folks who were the replacement jet pilots, or FLAPS as some call, us get it.
Last edited by forgot to bid; 02-26-2009 at 01:49 PM.
02-26-2009, 02:00 PM
#56
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
I've got a business idea... since we've been challenged to come up with one to present... use A320s and when that stops being profitable we'll supplement them with E-Jets. Its an original idea.
Or we can stick to making the worlds largest airline and very possibly the strongest Legacy carrier just that much better by getting DALPA to fight to add Compass to Delta and thus take mainline sized aircraft out of DCI and back to mainline.
Or we can stick to making the worlds largest airline and very possibly the strongest Legacy carrier just that much better by getting DALPA to fight to add Compass to Delta and thus take mainline sized aircraft out of DCI and back to mainline.
02-26-2009, 02:40 PM
#57
Can't abide NAI
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 12,037
What I hope to learn, if there is time before this Compass representational issue goes too far, is how much the answers to the issues you raise may have changed since bankruptcy / re-org & merger. Many of our assumptions may be based on data which is no longer accurate. Let me provide one example.
We were told one reason flying could not be brought back to mainline was the costs outside of pilot costs. The costs of under wing service & gate agents. Now those positions have been consolidated into DGS. That former objection has been cleared.
It may be time for a fresh look at the numbers so that we can intelligently develop a rational, objective, long term scope strategy.
Without this plan, we are stuck constantly reacting to bad news and the easy answer is always a scope concession.
Like you said, we must find a way to get there.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 02-26-2009 at 04:40 PM.
02-27-2009, 03:39 AM
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
If you haven't figured out by now, the way the company is run IS a labor issue.
Or you can sit back and get Tilton, Kolshak, Carty or a bunch of thieving New York bankruptcy lawyers and "investment" bankers to run YOUR company for their personal benefit.
02-27-2009, 03:44 AM
#59
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Those aircraft used to be at ASA and Mesaba. At ASA, they went away completely due to tightened scope (achieved during Section 6 negotiations). At Mesaba, they didn't violate seat limits.
Last edited by slowplay; 02-27-2009 at 04:32 AM.
02-27-2009, 03:47 AM
#60
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
It didn't.
There's no need to relive the history, but there's something there from which you can learn.
Last edited by slowplay; 02-27-2009 at 04:25 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
