What if we got the 717s with TODAY's SCOPE?
05-23-2012, 02:04 PM
#111
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
No matter how you look at it, this one decreases outsourcing. I'm not really sure how it won't bankrupt another regional in the process with how many net planes they are going to be losing.
05-23-2012, 02:10 PM
#112
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Posts: 354
True, it decreases the total outsourced seats, but it only decreases the undesirable outsourcing that management already doesn't like, and it increases the desirable outsourcing they want. The 50 seater will die whether you give away large RJs or not.
05-23-2012, 02:16 PM
#113
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: west coast wannabe
Posts: 815
Exactly. Just because it decreases a larger amount of gas guzzing 50 seaters, doesnt make it right to increase a smaller in amount, but more damaging to our career 76 seaters,
05-23-2012, 02:29 PM
#114
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: 777 Sim Instructor
Posts: 745
It seems like I need to be drinking what you are drinking, Captain.
You think SWA is a point to point airline?, In reality they fly to major hubs and do consider PHX, OAK,BWI, MDW as HUBS that they do frequent. Albeit, they might have a hundred legs to get from one HUB to the next.
I would like you to tell me why you think it is more money for us to fly our own jets? Pilot pay is not a good answer because it is marginal at best. Have you considered lost business? Have you considered fuel costs to DCI? Reliability to DCI? Union strife at DCI (Republic/Chatagua)? Have you thought of our money funding airlines like F9 via Republic and the consequences of lost business to funding our partners business ventures? What about outsourcing to a carrier (Skywest) that does business with UAL?
I answered this on another thread but with so many threads on the same subject I'm getting confused. First let me say that I wish what you are saying is true but sadly I really don't believe it is. Everybody at DL from Richard to Ronny the ramp rat make more than any DCI carrier and remember wages are only a part of the total cost of an employee. Our overhead is huge and adding a couple more a/c types to the mix only makes it go up.I believe in simple truths, our Mgmt team is really smart and for the life of me I can't figure out if it was so profitable why they aren't doing it. They would fly blimps if they could make money doing it but they also refuse to fly places or planes that don't make money. In those areas we outsource, I don't like it but I do like a consistently profitable Company because it tends to float all boats.
It is not a black and white issue. There are many variables that need to be put into this algorithm. There are many inefficiencies that happen when you outsource and I am willing to bet in the long run, it would be cheaper to operate our own metal/fleet.
**Look, now, at the 50 seat issue. Amortized through the life of their service with a DCI, I guarantee you it would have been cheaper for us to run and operate them.
TEN
You think SWA is a point to point airline?, In reality they fly to major hubs and do consider PHX, OAK,BWI, MDW as HUBS that they do frequent. Albeit, they might have a hundred legs to get from one HUB to the next.I would like you to tell me why you think it is more money for us to fly our own jets? Pilot pay is not a good answer because it is marginal at best. Have you considered lost business? Have you considered fuel costs to DCI? Reliability to DCI? Union strife at DCI (Republic/Chatagua)? Have you thought of our money funding airlines like F9 via Republic and the consequences of lost business to funding our partners business ventures? What about outsourcing to a carrier (Skywest) that does business with UAL?
I answered this on another thread but with so many threads on the same subject I'm getting confused. First let me say that I wish what you are saying is true but sadly I really don't believe it is. Everybody at DL from Richard to Ronny the ramp rat make more than any DCI carrier and remember wages are only a part of the total cost of an employee. Our overhead is huge and adding a couple more a/c types to the mix only makes it go up.I believe in simple truths, our Mgmt team is really smart and for the life of me I can't figure out if it was so profitable why they aren't doing it. They would fly blimps if they could make money doing it but they also refuse to fly places or planes that don't make money. In those areas we outsource, I don't like it but I do like a consistently profitable Company because it tends to float all boats.
It is not a black and white issue. There are many variables that need to be put into this algorithm. There are many inefficiencies that happen when you outsource and I am willing to bet in the long run, it would be cheaper to operate our own metal/fleet.
**Look, now, at the 50 seat issue. Amortized through the life of their service with a DCI, I guarantee you it would have been cheaper for us to run and operate them.
TEN
05-23-2012, 02:58 PM
#115
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Space Shuttle PIC
Posts: 2,007
What if you put more efficient 70 or 76 seaters on those same 50 seat routes? Would it be better for everyone to actually make a profit to those smaller cities? Those remaining 70 seaters (102 of them) will probably be put on existing 50 seat routes to try to make profits.
05-23-2012, 03:10 PM
#116
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Space Shuttle PIC
Posts: 2,007
Bill,
Respectfully, you are a senior MD88 FO for one reason only, your job is being outsourced. Please stop believing everything you hear and look around. SWA is not outsourcing, yet they fly RJ routes with 737s. PLease dont tell me that their time is coming. I have heard that about SWA for years and all they do is become stronger.
There is a reason (ulterior motif) that we are outsourcing, and I am willing to bet my CAREER that it has nothing to do with pilot costs. This outsourcing is a way to whip saw, PLANE
and simple. Again, I appreciate your loyalty, honesty and desire to support your company and union (as do I), but sometimes you can not be a "sheep", you have to wake up and look around. Our careers are withering away.
With utmost respect and concern,
TEN
Respectfully, you are a senior MD88 FO for one reason only, your job is being outsourced. Please stop believing everything you hear and look around. SWA is not outsourcing, yet they fly RJ routes with 737s. PLease dont tell me that their time is coming. I have heard that about SWA for years and all they do is become stronger.
There is a reason (ulterior motif) that we are outsourcing, and I am willing to bet my CAREER that it has nothing to do with pilot costs. This outsourcing is a way to whip saw, PLANE
and simple. Again, I appreciate your loyalty, honesty and desire to support your company and union (as do I), but sometimes you can not be a "sheep", you have to wake up and look around. Our careers are withering away.With utmost respect and concern,
TEN
I am a senior MD88 FO because I live in ATL, don't like allnighters (did them on the 767 a few years ago, hated it), and I like my QOL. I could be a mid level 73N FO, but I choose QOL.
Southwest does not fly to the same size cities as our RJs do. Airtran does (sort of---some Charleston WV, some Bloomington, some Moline, etc), but a lot of that will go away (17 cities I read) when they do give up the 717s. We bring in feed from a lot of smaller cities (Dothan, Fayatteville, Meridian, Monroe, Shreevport, etc) that they don't touch, and probably do well. If the 50 seaters aren't cutting it and can't break even because of the fuel costs or higher CASM, then a 70 seater on those same 50 seat routes is the next choice. We could try to throw an A319 or 717 on them, and we have added a few mainline planes to some of those cities (DC9s to FAY now), but not on all of the flights. We could try to crew them ourselves, and as pilots that might not be a bad idea, but the rest of the crew and ground people would be from where? ASA? They are a lot cheaper, and we can't beat their prices as feed. Those guys are getting squeezed into BK. Colgan now has to give up the Dash-8-400s because they can't fly them for as low as UAL wants them, and now Republic will try. That is what we are up against, and unfortunately we are too expensive in that area. As far as a whipsaw, you may be correct, or you may not see that the company does want to be a money maker, and put the right planes on the right routes. A lot of people didn't think we could get the 717s, and those planes could be great for routes within 1000 miles of ATL or LGA, and could very well replace a lot of those 76 seaters currently used. The RJ growth will also be tied in with the 717/A319 growth, so they won't get more 76 seat RJs without mainline growing too. That helps.
As far as waking up and looking around, I think you may need to do that too. The pay rates could be a bit higher, I agree, but the amount of good changes in a current horrible contract, and the length of only 3 years, is hard to beat these days. We are light years ahead of UAL and AA(US), and they will struggle to keep up.
Respectfully,
Bill
05-23-2012, 03:28 PM
#117
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,544
05-23-2012, 05:55 PM
#118
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Putting the FUN in dysfunctional
05-23-2012, 05:57 PM
#119
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
05-23-2012, 06:29 PM
#120
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Carl
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
