Delta Pilots Association
10-23-2010, 05:01 PM
#1532
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,909
The numbers of DCI aircraft has gone down, but in reality, the DCI ASMs have remained stable or gone up under recent Leadership.
In reality it represents a worse situation than before.
2 or 3 50 Seat RJs do not replace a DC-9 or a A319.
A single EMB175 or CRJ-700/900 can. Those aircraft are now operating what was exclusively 100 seat mainline territory. That DIRECTLY translates into lost seats at the mainline.
Lansing, Saginaw, Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo, Flint, Traverse City, Fargo, Minot, Grand Forks, Bismark, Great Falls, Missoula, Kalispell, Saskatoon, Regina, Winipeg, Toronto, Montreal, Indianapolis, Houston, Dallas/Fort Worth, Omaha...the list goes on and on of formerly mainline cities that were completely relegated to the DCI carriers under this administration.
It's great that the 50 seaters are getting pulled from Iron Mountain, but it doesn't change one thing, and management can spring them back into action at a moments notice.
And not even a word about scope issues when the new President was running. Will our new MEC leadership follow in his footsteps?
Nu
10-23-2010, 05:58 PM
#1533
Underboob King
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Guppy Commander
Posts: 4,412
neither moak or alpa has anything to do with the reduction in RJ's. People can try and spin it that way but the only thing thats reduced those numbers is the economy and the efficiencies (or lack there of).
10-23-2010, 06:28 PM
#1535
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
The DL/NW merger obviously went infinitely better than the US/AW merger. However I don't think you can credit that too much to Moak. Not saying he didn't play a significant role...he did...but he had an infinitely superior starting position and that can't be denied. If either DL or NWA had at the time a large group on furlough in addition to a vastly different relative seniority and fleet type/pay category issue like the US/AW merger, odds are 100% it would not have been nearly as smooth as it ended up.
And not to defend Prater one bit, but what was he supposed to do when both sides agreed to binding arbitration and then one didn't like the end result? Even if he was "successful" getting it overturned, a DOH-style integration would have been just as contentious and equally not viewed as a "success" by the other half of the merger and/or the rest of the entire industry.
Moak sold scope, defended it, claimed it was job security and is now the top guy in a regional heavy membership structure. Maybe he will do a good job. I agree 100% that we don't need a "burn it down" Dubinsky approach at the MEC or national level and that diplomacy paves the way for progress to a large extent. But defending, promoting or tolerating scope sales past, present or future, even and especially by dodging the issue in the first place, is unacceptable. That someone could be on record defending prior agreements allowing management to sell more and more of your flying to the lowest bidder, and then acting suprised that when they do exactly that then the flying you still have faces increased negative pressure on wages, especially after bragging about how such scope sales would benefit mainline pay in the first place, is absolute and complete insanity, lack of intellect or both. To then ignore the issue and pretend it will just go away just so you can get political points for a national office that you claimed on more than one occasion that you weren't guning for, well that is suspiscious at best.
Part of Prater's problem was yelling "taking it back" and then not. So Moak will solve the yelling about it problem. But will he actually do it? Is it fair for us to base our predictions on how he will handle things going forward based on his unappologetic actions in the past? If yes, then what exactly other than some extremely vague "working together" rhetoric leads us to believe he won't pencil whip any and every scope sale that comes along and in all likelyhood maybe even be behind most or all of them in the first place?
Using the DL/NW merger's relative success (and it really was, compared to almost any other large merger in history) what do we have to base such cockeyed optimism on? Especially in light of Moak's epic fail of a position on Scope previously and his complete lack of acknowledgement of the issue since then?
I'll give him a chance to the extent that we pretty much have to right now. But it will absolutely be trust but verify, which as we know is code for a significant lack of trust in the first place.
And not to defend Prater one bit, but what was he supposed to do when both sides agreed to binding arbitration and then one didn't like the end result? Even if he was "successful" getting it overturned, a DOH-style integration would have been just as contentious and equally not viewed as a "success" by the other half of the merger and/or the rest of the entire industry.
Moak sold scope, defended it, claimed it was job security and is now the top guy in a regional heavy membership structure. Maybe he will do a good job. I agree 100% that we don't need a "burn it down" Dubinsky approach at the MEC or national level and that diplomacy paves the way for progress to a large extent. But defending, promoting or tolerating scope sales past, present or future, even and especially by dodging the issue in the first place, is unacceptable. That someone could be on record defending prior agreements allowing management to sell more and more of your flying to the lowest bidder, and then acting suprised that when they do exactly that then the flying you still have faces increased negative pressure on wages, especially after bragging about how such scope sales would benefit mainline pay in the first place, is absolute and complete insanity, lack of intellect or both. To then ignore the issue and pretend it will just go away just so you can get political points for a national office that you claimed on more than one occasion that you weren't guning for, well that is suspiscious at best.
Part of Prater's problem was yelling "taking it back" and then not. So Moak will solve the yelling about it problem. But will he actually do it? Is it fair for us to base our predictions on how he will handle things going forward based on his unappologetic actions in the past? If yes, then what exactly other than some extremely vague "working together" rhetoric leads us to believe he won't pencil whip any and every scope sale that comes along and in all likelyhood maybe even be behind most or all of them in the first place?
Using the DL/NW merger's relative success (and it really was, compared to almost any other large merger in history) what do we have to base such cockeyed optimism on? Especially in light of Moak's epic fail of a position on Scope previously and his complete lack of acknowledgement of the issue since then?
I'll give him a chance to the extent that we pretty much have to right now. But it will absolutely be trust but verify, which as we know is code for a significant lack of trust in the first place.
With respect to Scope, Moak irritated many (inlcuding the MEC, I believe) with the LOA affirming language we already had, but the reality is that this administration didn't cough up as many RJ's as the previous. And you seem to forget that whatever was allowed was allowed under an 1113 proceeding, and you must also remember that this MEC didn't play any role in the birth of Compass, but nonetheless inherited it in the merger.
This is not to say that I am blindly trusting this MEC (or this pilot group) WRT future Scope sales, but my support to date is based on accomplishments that were meaningful and novel. It's easy in peactime to ask why we had casualties in wartime, and it's easy to forget we could have had many more, except we had pretty good execution, and pretty innovative strategies. I feel that the validation of our recent approach will come through C2012. I'm willing to allow this MEC, which I think handled itself well so far, to have a chance to run the show through this next period.
With proper oversight. This is why I think it's a good thing to see some new blood in the current council elections, as long as the new blood is composed of smart and effective people. I also don't think this is about strong personalities, but a type of action. This is why I'm glad Moak is moving on, and we have a chance to see whether constructive engagement might work at that level.
10-23-2010, 06:40 PM
#1536
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
I didn't know he was running. Interesting! Should be fun to watch.
10-23-2010, 06:44 PM
#1537
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Carl
10-23-2010, 06:55 PM
#1538
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Slow, I thought it was stated that all of the pilots that took the early out caused the pension to be grossly underfunded? Didn't that action that many describe cause the pension fund to become unstable and therefore the "need" for termination?
Just asking. That is the story I was told.
Just asking. That is the story I was told.
10-23-2010, 07:24 PM
#1539
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,544
The ONLY reason is that the 50 seat market died of it's own accord. I don't think anyone would give Moak credit for that or even the foresight to predict that. 70 and 76 seaters are all the rage now though, and 250+ are allowed to be outsourced to the lowest bidder. Soon Delta's smallest plane will be 150 seats and tons and tons of former DC9 routes will be flown by the large outsourced RJ's that were suposedly good for growth.
Selling flying to management so they can shop it to the lowest bidder and actually thinking that is sustainable in terms of pilot prosperity is absolute insanity. Giving management the ability to outcource such a large percentage of your flying/block hours/pilot jobs to the lowest bidder while at the same time thinking you will get a raise out of it is absolute insanity.
To any extent that Delta is successful today had absolute zero percent to do with outsourced RJs but you hit on a crucial point. Moak probably still believes that is the case now as he did then, and that will likely influence his decisions on a go forwar basis.
10-24-2010, 07:35 AM
#1540
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 852
I see this is trotted out quite often by the true believers, and makes for a great sound bite, but that's all it is.
The numbers of DCI aircraft has gone down, but in reality, the DCI ASMs have remained stable or gone up under recent Leadership.
In reality it represents a worse situation than before.
The numbers of DCI aircraft has gone down, but in reality, the DCI ASMs have remained stable or gone up under recent Leadership.
In reality it represents a worse situation than before.
Compare, contrast, then try again.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Lbell911
Regional
23
04-22-2012 10:33 AM
