TA 2012 Contract Highlights

Closed Thread Subscribe

Page 8 of 12

« First

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

06-17-2012, 11:56 AM

#71

forgot to bid

veut gagner à la loterie

Thread Starter

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: Light Chop

Posts: 23,286

Quote:

Originally Posted by alfaromeo

I just can't help but notice the part about the unwanted jets that are no longer economical decreasing while the wanted jets that are more economical (or in Bill's words profitable) increasing.

What language in the TA reverses that trajectory?

I get there will be caps, but we have a cap right now and we're tossing it. So I am learning that caps are not to be taken seriously. So what language reverses the trajectory of an increasing number of large Lumberg jet hulls?

06-17-2012, 12:02 PM

#72

80ktsClamp

Da Hudge

Joined APC: Oct 2006

Position: Poodle Whisperer

Posts: 17,473

Quote:

Originally Posted by More Bacon

Fortunately, should you have a change of heart, you are allowed to change your vote until the window closes.

There's a DPA article coming out that will state that the voting software only allows you to change your no vote to a yes vote. It inhibits you from changing your yes vote to no.

06-17-2012, 12:03 PM

#73

80ktsClamp

Da Hudge

Joined APC: Oct 2006

Position: Poodle Whisperer

Posts: 17,473

Quote:

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

It's so sad that this TA just plays toward the hate of 50 seaters (engendered hate of comair and the 50 seaters they started with) and not the real long term problem of outsourcing.

06-17-2012, 12:08 PM

#74

forgot to bid

veut gagner à la loterie

Thread Starter

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: Light Chop

Posts: 23,286

Quote:

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp

It's so sad that this TA just plays toward the hate of 50 seaters (engendered hate of comair and the 50 seaters they started with) and not the real long term problem of outsourcing.

So placate the mob by tossing them some red meat like you're getting rid of the 50 seaters and reducing the number of 76 seaters by 32!!! Just as long as they vote for the TA and not question the details.

Here's a question, if I wanted 70 new 76-seaters tomorrow, how long would it take until Bombardier was able to fulfill that order? 2015?

06-17-2012, 02:20 PM

#75

Columbia

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Aug 2010

Posts: 2,530

Quote:

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

Filling in for Lumberg:
So you're telling me you don't want to work for a profitable company? Are you sure you don't work for Southwest?

06-17-2012, 02:44 PM

#76

Bill Lumberg

Banned

Joined APC: Jul 2006

Position: Space Shuttle PIC

Posts: 2,007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Columbia

Filling in for Lumberg:
So you're telling me you don't want to work for a profitable company? Are you sure you don't work for Southwest?

It's sad some of you guys dream about getting the Beech 1900 market back. Why stop at RJs? Every darn pilot should work for mainline, including the traffic watch guy in the C152! Especially that guy, he would look great in the hat and jacket.....

Some areas have already been outsourced, and it really would be cost prohibitive to recapture it. Routes to smaller cities, just won't make money with a 717. There is no way to compete with the whipsawed regionals to the smaller cities. So, cap 'em, ratio it, and concentrate on reducing outsourcing as best you can. But, if a route has to have an RJ, put one on there that does make money. Have a great day!

06-17-2012, 03:09 PM

#77

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: 747-400 Captain

Posts: 12,487

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg

It's sad some of you guys dream about getting the Beech 1900 market back.

It's sadder that you don't understand the importance of that if there's Delta painted on the side of that Beech 1900.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg

Why stop at RJs? Every darn pilot should work for mainline, including the traffic watch guy in the C152! Especially that guy, he would look great in the hat and jacket.....

If Delta is painted on the side of that 152, it should be a Delta pilot flying it. Period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg

Some areas have already been outsourced, and it really would be cost prohibitive to recapture it.

You know nothing of such a cost for the company. Prohibitive is your opinion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg

Routes to smaller cities, just won't make money with a 717.

You're in no position to know that. You do NOT have the data.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg

There is no way to compete with the whipsawed regionals to the smaller cities.

Sure there is. The company would rather have the whipsaw at any cost IMO however.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg

So, cap 'em,

We tried that already. Now people like you are advocating a new larger cap.

Caps mean nothing if people just continue to Lumberg them.

Carl

06-17-2012, 03:52 PM

#78

FL370

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jan 2008

Position: A somewhere

Posts: 396

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Lumberg

It's sad some of you guys dream about getting the Beech 1900 market back. Why stop at RJs?

Why stop with the RJs indeed! Bet those Skywest and Comair guys could fly the MD88 and 90 as well as we do, but cheaper. After all we want to work for a company that makes money, right?

06-18-2012, 08:10 AM

#79

georgetg

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jul 2006

Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift

Posts: 1,724

Quote:

Originally Posted by alfaromeo

The agreement removes a massive amount of DCI capacity that allows these aircraft to be added. The 88 717's are mandated by the TA. Got it yet?

It doesn't do that at all.

It removes aircraft from DCI
It provides a block-hour ratio

Neither of those two are measures of capacity.

Our AFKLM/AZ JV measures capacity expressed in EASK and has no block-hour provisions, yet we "win" on the block-hour side becasue we fly smaller jets.

Cheers
George