Airline Pilot Forums

There is a merger website online now with the final details...

I think all DAL and NWA pilots can go and see what they came up with. For some reason I can't copy it.

The good: Looks like they negotiated for pilot jumpseaters never to be bumped off for weight restrictions..

The bad: The pay is higher but still not what our last contract was..... But hey, it's all about protecting jobs. (See "the ugly")


The ugly: I don't know. Looks like the furlough protection for both sides is VERY weak... (Protected from furlough as a result of the merger)

I'm still a "half full" guy, but my socks are still on....

New K Now (I guess this is it)

There is a merger website online now with the final details...

I think all DAL and NWA pilots can go and see what they came up with. For some reason I can't copy it.

The good: Looks like they negotiated for pilot jumpseaters never to be bumped off for weight restrictions..

The bad: The pay is higher but still not what our last contract was..... But hey, it's all about protecting jobs. (See "the ugly")


The ugly: I don't know. Looks like the furlough protection for both sides is VERY weak... (Protected from furlough as a result of the merger)

I'm still a "half full" guy, but my socks are still on....

New K Now (I guess this is it)

Do you have a link for the posting.

Thanks

There is a merger website online now with the final details...

I think all DAL and NWA pilots can go and see what they came up with. For some reason I can't copy it.


Dude- who would post something like that and then not include a link!?!?!? :mad: If you can't copy it, then just type it.

NO SOUP FOR YOU!

Dude- who would post something like that and then not include a link!?!?!? :mad: If you can't copy it, then just type it.

NO SOUP FOR YOU!

I know, right?!?:eek::D

its via the alpa website

its via the alpa website


Where on the ALPA site?

I do not think that it is on the DAL site yet.

the full TA isnt posted on there that i know of. Its just the same info you guys probably already have.

Where on the ALPA site?

its on the NWA MEC website.

Do you guys have the "State of the Industry" slide show via your mec site that was put out by DAL and NW? Pretty scary stuff in that thing.:eek:

No. I find it interesting that you guys have not ratified the TA yet. Didn't your MEC meet yesterday?

No. I find it interesting that you guys have not ratified the TA yet. Didn't your MEC meet yesterday?

Our MEC is sitting on the TA and won't release it until the NW MEC ratifies it, yet, the NW MEC releases it to their membership BEFORE even ratifying it?

No. I find it interesting that you guys have not ratified the TA yet. Didn't your MEC meet yesterday?

Yesterday and today and Lee Moak was to be there on one of those days.

Our MEC is sitting on the TA and won't release it until the NW MEC ratifies it, yet, the NW MEC releases it to their membership BEFORE even ratifying it?

Wrong we dont have the TA we just have small details of it. I expect to see it ratified today.

Do you have a link for the posting.

Thanks


Looks like you have to go through NWA ALPA's website to get to the merger webpage. Sorry guys, I thought you had the same page.

Also, I take back what I said about the furlough protection being weak. Looks like it is pretty strong for both sides.

I know. I know. No soup for me. I'll see how I can get back into the soup line..... :rolleyes:

Looks like you have to go through NWA ALPA's website to get to the merger webpage. Sorry guys, I thought you had the same page.

Also, I take back what I said about the furlough protection being weak. Looks like it is pretty strong for both sides.

I know. I know. No soup for me. I'll see how I can get back into the soup line..... :rolleyes:

Strong for both sides? RIIIIIGHT....

http://www.pmdawnonline.com/forum/images/smilies/ducka.gif

Don't hold your breath. I guess you missed furlough this last round, huh?

Strong for both sides? RIIIIIGHT....

http://www.pmdawnonline.com/forum/images/smilies/ducka.gif

Don't hold your breath. I guess you missed furlough this last round, huh?

Yes, I did. But I did suggest that everyone fly less hours to keep everyone on the property. I also refused to fly high time. I'm all for doing whatever it takes to keep all pilots from BOTH sides flying. Are you?

Yes, I did. But I did suggest that everyone fly less hours to keep everyone on the property. I also refused to fly high time. I'm all for doing whatever it takes to keep all pilots from BOTH sides flying. Are you?

I too refuse to pick up open time or fly any high time. Personally time with my family is what I want..... Give me 75 hours per month and I will be happy. I will also be happy to go to 65 if it means keeping all DAL and NWA pilots on the property!

Yes, I did. But I did suggest that everyone fly less hours to keep everyone on the property. I also refused to fly high time. I'm all for doing whatever it takes to keep all pilots from BOTH sides flying. Are you?

Yes, I am. That is why Delta had low monthly line of time limits during the furlough.

But there are always greedy guys in every bunch. We had plenty of guys working overtime while I was on the street. We also had "post-retirement pilots" - PRP's - Guys who came back AFTER they retired and got 50% of their pensions...and KEPT FLYING WHILE I WAS ON THE STREET! But it was all to save the company, of course. We couldn't have survived without their services.:rolleyes:

AT NWA, you guys just started an alter ego airline called Compass and sent your jobs there while keeping your guys on the street for 5 years.

Yes, I am. That is why Delta had low monthly line of time limits during the furlough.

But there are always greedy guys in every bunch. We had plenty of guys working overtime while I was on the street. We also had "post-retirement pilots" - PRP's - Guys who came back AFTER they retired and got 50% of their pensions...and KEPT FLYING WHILE I WAS ON THE STREET! But it was all to save the company, of course. We couldn't have survived without their services.:rolleyes:

AT NWA, you guys just started an alter ego airline called Compass and sent your jobs there while keeping your guys on the street for 5 years.


WOW, if that ain't the pot calling the kettle black!! Let's count how many 120 seaters and less you guys have farmed out. Good 'ol DAL started this whole RJ mess in 1995 because of weak scope protection. At last check DAL doesn't have a single airplane on the property less than 125 seat. We have over 70 right now, and unfortunately will be down to 61 at years end.
We also have some flowback protection if needed (let's hope it's not needed) which every F/O I have flown with has said they would be willing to go do if needed.
Do your research before spouting off on NWA.

WOW, if that ain't the pot calling the kettle black!! Let's count how many 120 seaters and less you guys have farmed out. Good 'ol DAL started this whole RJ mess in 1995 because of weak scope protection. At last check DAL doesn't have a single airplane on the property less than 125 seat. We have over 70 right now, and unfortunately will be down to 61 at years end.
We also have some flowback protection if needed (let's hope it's not needed) which every F/O I have flown with has said they would be willing to go do if needed.
Do your research before spouting off on NWA.

No argument on the Comair mess. I could not agree with you more on that one.

Yeah, your less than 125 seat airplane is called a DC-9. We had one like it. It was called the 737-200. It burned a lot of fuel. We sent them to the desert. :D

I don't need to research. I can spout just fine. I know the history of the industry. I'm on my third carrier and have been furloughed. I worked for two regionals as well. I would never go to Compass - I need to be able to feed my family.:eek:

WOW, if that ain't the pot calling the kettle black!! Let's count how many 120 seaters and less you guys have farmed out. Good 'ol DAL started this whole RJ mess in 1995 because of weak scope protection. At last check DAL doesn't have a single airplane on the property less than 125 seat. We have over 70 right now, and unfortunately will be down to 61 at years end.
We also have some flowback protection if needed (let's hope it's not needed) which every F/O I have flown with has said they would be willing to go do if needed.
Do your research before spouting off on NWA.I've done my research and based on my figures every DC9 replaced by an RJ adds about $4.1 million to the bottom line annually. I've also read Steenland's quotes from the third and fourth quarter 07 investor's conference calls where he says there is "NO" restriction on replacing the DC9's with RJ's as fast as he can get them.

I agree that DAL is responsible for the Connection mess. But, NWA brings round two to the merger.

My vote on the JPWA is going to hinge on whether there are good job protection provisions.

I fly a 767 and don't particularly want to go back to the RJ. 3,700 hours of PIC and 1,000 in the right seat was enough. I just go get your walk around with a smile on my face if the arbitrators will let me keep my job. Thanks.

Delta has never had strong scope however we had a hard 50 seat limit in the mid nineties. NWA was allowing Air Wisconson to fly 4 engine 100 seat aircraft painted in NWA colors. Delta attempted to fly this same aircraft at ASA and we were able to shut the operation down in the next contract.

. Delta attempted to fly this same aircraft at ASA and we were able to shut the operation down in the next contract.

Well, not quite. The 146 was granfathered. I wouldn't call that shutdown but instead not allowed to grow beyond what was already flying. Kind of like Compass. The only reason ASA got rid of the 146s were because they were a maintenance nightmare.

Delta has never had strong scope however we had a hard 50 seat limit in the mid nineties. NWA was allowing Air Wisconson to fly 4 engine 100 seat aircraft painted in NWA colors. Delta attempted to fly this same aircraft at ASA and we were able to shut the operation down in the next contract.


It was Mesaba flying the AVRO's, limited to 69 seats.

dl

how can anyone say they were better than someone else when it comes to scope. all the majors failed miserably.

how can anyone say they were better than someone else when it comes to scope. all the majors failed miserably.Well, we just negotiated another agreement. We negotiated this agreement with the full knowledge that DC9 flying will be outsourced unless we stop it. We can't blame past failures if we vote "yes" now.

Well, we just negotiated another agreement. We negotiated this agreement with the full knowledge that DC9 flying will be outsourced unless we stop it. We can't blame past failures if we vote "yes" now.



Everyone including DAL reps are in agreement that the DC9s arent going anywhere anytime soon and will be used as a filler. DAL people are up in MSP at NATCO telling everyone the DC9s arent leaving in the near term. Which is good for ALL of us.

Everyone including DAL reps are in agreement that the DC9s arent going anywhere anytime soon and will be used as a filler. DAL people are up in MSP at NATCO telling everyone the DC9s arent leaving in the near term. Which is good for ALL of us.

that may be true but you still have to have scope to prevent the possibility of it happening.

I remember when management said that the 50 seaters were only going to replace the props and bring up new markets until larger airplanes could move in. we all know how that turned out...

Everyone including DAL reps are in agreement that the DC9s arent going anywhere anytime soon and will be used as a filler. DAL people are up in MSP at NATCO telling everyone the DC9s arent leaving in the near term. Which is good for ALL of us.

so have they stopped the retirements of 30 plus airframes this year? What you are saying is contrary to what Delta management is putting out. They said to expect to continue seeing ongoing retirements of the nines.

so have they stopped the retirements of 30 plus airframes this year? What you are saying is contrary to what Delta management is putting out. They said to expect to continue seeing ongoing retirements of the nines.


Evidently the 61 dc9s will be significantly used in the new dal system. The other 30 -9s are being parked not retired. They COULD be brought back out if needed. That may or may not happen but so far they have increased the number we are keeping from 58 to 61 so anything is possible. I have also heard that scope will not be further relaxed and i am anxious to see the details on section 1 also. So far DAL is leading to getting rid of 50 seaters and cutting capacity. They can replace 2 50 seaters on a route for nearly the same cost as 1 dc9. It will reduce frequency but keep the same number of seats. well shall see.

But there are always greedy guys in every bunch. We had plenty of guys working overtime while I was on the street. We also had "post-retirement pilots" - PRP's - Guys who came back AFTER they retired and got 50% of their pensions...and KEPT FLYING WHILE I WAS ON THE STREET! But it was all to save the company, of course. We couldn't have survived without their services.:rolleyes:
.

Whoa there pack trip. 2000 or more senior pilots retired in six to eight months. You tell me how any airline would have handled replacing that many unexpected pilots retiring. What would it have done to the international operation? You think you would have gotten back quicker if 2300 captains' positions had to be back filled in training without using qualified pilots for a short period of time? The program lasted less than a year, except for about 5 Lead Check Airman who stayed on for about a year after the program started. Did they leave some PRPs longer than was agreed to in the LOA? Yes, a few. But most only lasted two to three months while training was sorted out.

Oh and BTW, you're welcome for the COPRA payments and for the majority of the guys not flying greenslips (I did one, over a 25 year period). Wait! I was one of those greedy PRPs. I guess I should have voted not have the MCF refund go to the COPRA payments, since I was "greedy". And in my greediness, I should have tried to stop the union from setting up a furlough relief fund. Oh and I thank YOU for not pressing the "union" to at least file a grievance for the termination of the unqualified pension portion on day one of the BK. I would have hated to have the union waste any of its precious resources on retired pilots. So 50% of the my pension equals to a 30% FAE in the long run. I get zero from the PBGC. But being a "greedy" pilot, I should be happy with that.

And finally, exactly how long were you on furlough? However long it was, it will not be as long as I have with my terminated portion of my retirement that ALPA and the DAL pilots did NOTHING, I repeat, NOTHING about. How's that $600 million bribe thing going? And you calling me greedy for two months of work? Maybe if you and some of your buds had pressed the union to do the right thing for the retired pilots, I wouldn't have to be over here flying in the land of sand and heat. We all knew that the company would try and terminate our pensions (that's why we left), but none of us thought the active pilots would roll over dead for a $600 million bribe/payout whatever.

But water under the bridge.

They can replace 2 50 seaters on a route for nearly the same cost as 1 dc9. It will reduce frequency but keep the same number of seats. well shall see.

Dead on. Keep the available seats to a market but cutting frequency still keeps the local politicians happy. Doesn't do much for the high $$ business guy, but they hate RJs anyway so that may be a wash. Also, RA likes keeping local politicans happy.

Ferd

so have they stopped the retirements of 30 plus airframes this year? What you are saying is contrary to what Delta management is putting out. They said to expect to continue seeing ongoing retirements of the nines.


Sailing,

Why are you so quick to get rid of the 9's? You as a pilot SHOULD want your airline to fly as many seats and sizes of aircraft as possible. I don't care what management is putting out. If they are, you need to be pushing back.

New K Now

Dead on. Keep the available seats to a market but cutting frequency still keeps the local politicians happy. Doesn't do much for the high $$ business guy, but they hate RJs anyway so that may be a wash. Also, RA likes keeping local politicans happy.

Ferd


Scope Provisions with the TA

• Scope: Our critical scope items, including the Compass and Mesaba flow agreements, are included in the TA. The new contract limits 51-76 seat feeder aircraft to 255, creates a new mainline fleet floor, and limits 76 seat aircraft in the event the flow agreements aren’t maintained or a furlough occurs.

Sailing,

Why are you so quick to get rid of the 9's? You as a pilot SHOULD want your airline to fly as many seats and sizes of aircraft as possible. I don't care what management is putting out. If they are, you need to be pushing back.

New K Now

I don't want to see them go. I did not want to see the 727's go. As a pilot I would love every airframe to stay. What is posted here about the nines however is not what Delta management is putting out and not the reality of the retirement schedule. They are being retired at a rapid rate as we speak. Reality sometimes sucks but its still reality!
The same thing applies to the 747 cargo operation. Ed Bastion was just asked about its future. He did not give a specific answer other then to say it was losing large amounts of money which could not be sustained. I would love to see it stick around. At the moment however it looks like it might be shut down at some point after the merger.

I don't want to see them go. I did not want to see the 727's go. As a pilot I would love every airframe to stay. What is posted here about the nines however is not what Delta management is putting out and not the reality of the retirement schedule. They are being retired at a rapid rate as we speak. Reality sometimes sucks but its still reality!
The same thing applies to the 747 cargo operation. Ed Bastion was just asked about its future. He did not give a specific answer other then to say it was losing large amounts of money which could not be sustained. I would love to see it stick around. At the moment however it looks like it might be shut down at some point after the merger.

I've said this in other threads but, if the 9's go we need to make sure they are replaced with mainline flying....

Scope Provisions with the TA

• Scope: Our critical scope items, including the Compass and Mesaba flow agreements, are included in the TA. The new contract limits 51-76 seat feeder aircraft to 255, creates a new mainline fleet floor, and limits 76 seat aircraft in the event the flow agreements aren’t maintained or a furlough occurs.

good god that's a big number...that's about 2500 pilot positions. is that more, the same or less than what is currently allowed between nwa and delta? how many are currently in service?

Scope Provisions with the TA

• Scope: Our critical scope items, including the Compass and Mesaba flow agreements, are included in the TA. The new contract limits 51-76 seat feeder aircraft to 255, creates a new mainline fleet floor, and limits 76 seat aircraft in the event the flow agreements aren’t maintained or a furlough occurs.

I think between Comair, ASA/SKYW, Pinnacle and Chatauqua there are well over 300 50 seaters flying. If this floor is truly set, there is going to be a significant service reduction by some or all of the RJ operators.

My feeling is that the cancellation of the Pinnacle 76 flying was more of a shot across the bow to get them to re-negotiate there whole contract or risk of being completely excluded from the party.

good god that's a big number...that's about 2500 pilot positions. is that more, the same or less than what is currently allowed between nwa and delta? how many are currently in service?

That's only 55 more than what's currently allowed in the DL CBA.

Scope Provisions with the TA

• Scope: Our critical scope items, including the Compass and Mesaba flow agreements, are included in the TA. The new contract limits 51-76 seat feeder aircraft to 255, creates a new mainline fleet floor, and limits 76 seat aircraft in the event the flow agreements aren’t maintained or a furlough occurs.

SP92,

Where did you get this from? I'm looking at what DALPA sent us this morning and I read it differently.

My interpretation is a max of 255 51-70 seaters AND a max of 120 71-76 seaters, with the caveat that there can be no more than 255 70-76 seaters. That allows for a total of 375 RJs.

From the PWA info DALPA sent out:

Amend Section 1 B. 40. to read:
40. “Permitted aircraft type” means:
a. a propeller-driven aircraft configured with 70 or fewer passenger seats and with a maximum certificated gross takeoff weight in the United States of 70,000 or fewer pounds, and

b. a jet aircraft certificated for operation in the United States for 50 or fewer passenger seats and with a maximum certificated gross takeoff weight in the United States of 65,000 or fewer pounds, and

c. one of up to 255 jet aircraft configured with 51-70 passenger seats and certificated in the United States with a maximum gross takeoff weight of 86,000 pounds or less (“70-seat jets”), and

d. one of up to 120 jet aircraft configured with 71-76 passenger seats and certificated in the United States with a maximum gross takeoff weight of 86,000 pounds or less (“76-seat jets”). The number of 76-seat jets may be increased above 120 by three 76-seat jets for each aircraft above the number of aircraft in the baseline fleet operated by the Company (in service, undergoing maintenance and operational spares) as of CBAID. The baseline fleet number will be 440+N, in which N is the number of aircraft (in service, undergoing maintenance and operational spares but not including permitted aircraft types) added to the Company’s baseline fleet from NWA. The number and type of all aircraft in the Company’s fleet on CBAID will be provided to the association. The number of 70-seat jets plus 76-seat jets permitted by Section 1 B. 40. may not exceed 255.
Exception: Up to the 36 EMB-175s that were operated and/or ordered by Northwest prior to CBAID may continue to be operated with up to a maximum gross takeoff weight of 89,000 pounds.

e. once the number of permitted 76-seat jets is established, it will not be reduced.
Exception one: If a pilot on the seniority list with an employment date prior to September 1, 2001 is placed on furlough, the Company will convert all 76-seat jets for operation as 70-seat jets.
Exception two: In the event the flow provisions of NWA LOA 2006-10 and LOA 2006-14 cease to be available, either at the feeder carrier affiliate referenced in such LOAs or at another carrier, the number of jet aircraft configured with 71-76 passenger seats specified in Section 1 B. 40. d. will revert to 85.

Scope Provisions with the TA

• Scope: Our critical scope items, including the Compass and Mesaba flow agreements, are included in the TA. The new contract limits 51-76 seat feeder aircraft to 255, creates a new mainline fleet floor, and limits 76 seat aircraft in the event the flow agreements aren’t maintained or a furlough occurs.

Should be interesting.... from what I see these are the following AC that fit that seating config that are in service (most numbers taken from APC, may be slightly off)....

ASA CRJ700 - 37 total
CMR CRJ700 - 15 total
CMR CRJ900 - 13 total
SKW CRJ700 - 15 total
SKW CRJ900 - 19 total
SA ERJ170 - 16 total
Pncl CRJ900 - 10 total
Fdm CRJ900 - 7 total
XJ CRJ900 - 23 total
CP ERJ 175 - 24 total

Total 179..... that means another 76 can still come on property.
orders that I found are

SKW CRJ900 - 2
SA ERJ175 - 10
Pncl CRJ900 - 6
Fdm CRJ900 - 7
XJ CRJ900 - 13 (by Dec.)
CP ERJ 175 - 12 (by Dec.)

Thats another 50. Even with the planned orders, there is room for a little more "regional" airline growth.

Dude,
Read the last part you highlighted. Here, I'll show you.

The number of 70-seat jets plus 76-seat jets permitted by Section 1 B. 40. may not exceed 255.

Looks to me like it says the max allowed is 255.

Correct, and they can swap out 70 seaters for 76 seater, which is what they will more than likely do.

Okay, I just reread it so let me see if I understand: The max number of RJs over 50 seats is 255, of which 120 can be over 70 seats with a max cap of 76 seats.

Is there a cap on RJs that are 50 seats and less? There's still a lot of those flying around.

That was my initial confusion with SP92's post. I read that to mean all RJs were capped at 255, but that's does not appear to be the case and that's what I was trying to point out. My bad for misreading that.

It's a good thing I ain't a lawyer.

Just the ones that are close in size to our fleet. We all know that the 50's are a dead bird, ergo no need to negotiate to limit those. They are trying to take those out on their own. Now the 70's and 90's, 1070's and 175's are a threat.

Is there a cap on RJs that are 50 seats and less? There's still a lot of those flying around.


There hasn't been a cap on 50 seaters for a looong time. However, I think they are self-limiting with the current oil prices. Basically, they are looking at the same fate as the old 19 seaters.

Just the ones that are close in size to our fleet. We all know that the 50's are a dead bird, ergo no need to negotiate to limit those. They are trying to take those out on their own. Now the 70's and 90's, 1070's and 175's are a threat.


Acl you just hit the nail on the head. BOTH of our groups gave up too much on scope in previous contracts. It LOOKS like the JPWA is a step in the right direction.

While some on this board seem to cheer the end of the -9 we need to fight for it. This JPWA has a 100 seat pay scale, the -9. If they say they are going to park the 9 we tell them;" fine what 100 seat aircraft will the mainline pilot group be flying?":D

I don't want to see them go. I did not want to see the 727's go. As a pilot I would love every airframe to stay. What is posted here about the nines however is not what Delta management is putting out and not the reality of the retirement schedule. They are being retired at a rapid rate as we speak. Reality sometimes sucks but its still reality!
The same thing applies to the 747 cargo operation. Ed Bastion was just asked about its future. He did not give a specific answer other then to say it was losing large amounts of money which could not be sustained. I would love to see it stick around. At the moment however it looks like it might be shut down at some point after the merger.

Where did you hear/read that? I would not be surprised if it is true....but there is a lot of conflicting information on the future of freight. Last I heard was...freight was finally breaking even and even starting to pull in some money. Recently, they did a lot of changes to freighter schedules. They cut some unprofitable routes and added some others. The rumor is, two domestic routes are going to be added including Atlanta. They are also planning to get back into HKG. As an NWA freight pilot, I will dearly miss it if it were to shut down. It is one of the best kept secrets in the NWA system. Great base, great airplane, great food and some good flying...and it is the best commute-jumpseat to Anchorage and Asia!

Acl you just hit the nail on the head. BOTH of our groups gave up too much on scope in previous contracts. It LOOKS like the JPWA is a step in the right direction.

While some on this board seem to cheer the end of the -9 we need to fight for it. This JPWA has a 100 seat pay scale, the -9. If they say they are going to park the 9 we tell them;" fine what 100 seat aircraft will the mainline pilot group be flying?":D

Agreed. I don't care if the 9s are here in 20 years so long as WE'RE the one's flying the 100 seater. If they stay on the property and that prevents additional RJs then all the more power to us. Mainline jobs are at stake and anyone advocating the need to get rid of a 9 with no mainline replacement is high.

I completely agree.

Where did you hear/read that? I would not be surprised if it is true....but there is a lot of conflicting information on the future of freight.

Ed Bastain does an online get together where you can lob softballs for him to answer. One question from last week was about the cargo op. He said it was losing money and they were looking at several options concerning it. that could be the ATL operation you heard about.

This JPWA has a 100 seat pay scale, the -9. If they say they are going to park the 9 we tell them;" fine what 100 seat aircraft will the mainline pilot group be flying?":D

Couldn't agree more.... well said.

It is one of the best kept secrets in the NWA system. Great base, great airplane, great food and some good flying...and it is the best commute-jumpseat to Anchorage and Asia!How's it configured? Tigers 747's had an entire first class section in the hump that jumpseaters and family could ride around on. I think it was about 14 seats and usually only three or four riders. Anything similar?

Agreed. I don't care if the 9s are here in 20 years so long as WE'RE the one's flying the 100 seater. If they stay on the property and that prevents additional RJs then all the more power to us. Mainline jobs are at stake and anyone advocating the need to get rid of a 9 with no mainline replacement is high.

Best post of the thread!!! Agreed 100%

Here are some of ED B's comments last week.

Borat (Jun 24, 2008 2:14:49 PM)
What will happen with NW's freighters? Is there a future for them?
Ed Bastian (Jun 24, 2008 2:14:49 PM)
Don't know. What I do know is they are losing a considerable amount of money and we will need to find
a solution to stem the loss.
Treehugger (Jun 24, 2008 2:16:50 PM)
Ed, thanks for talking with us today. Can you tell us the next hurdles for the merger? In other words, is
there anything blocking our way now?
Ed Bastian (Jun 24, 2008 2:16:50 PM)
The regulatory review process is going quite well and is on a path to be completed by November or
December. I don't see any significant hurdles to overcome before we consummate the merger. The
Delta and Northwest teams are working closely on integration plans and we will be making various
organizational announcements regarding the structure of the new company in the coming weeks. It's an
exciting time for all of us and we are anxious to get the merger underway.
Doug (Jun 24, 2008 2:19:15 PM)
Hey Ed, are there plans to get many more of the 777s? And, what new cities will we be serving with the
777s?
Ed Bastian (Jun 24, 2008 2:19:15 PM)
We are taking delivery of 6 additional 777LRs over the next year. We are looking at exercising 2
additional option positions for deliveries in 2010, as well. The aircraft will be used on east coast to Asia
routes and has been quite effective in the JFK to Mumbai service.

I have a question, too..

"Hey Ed, how is it that every question here just happens to lead in to your merger talking points?" :cool:

Where did you hear/read that? I would not be surprised if it is true....but there is a lot of conflicting information on the future of freight. Last I heard was...freight was finally breaking even and even starting to pull in some money. Recently, they did a lot of changes to freighter schedules. They cut some unprofitable routes and added some others. The rumor is, two domestic routes are going to be added including Atlanta. They are also planning to get back into HKG. As an NWA freight pilot, I will dearly miss it if it were to shut down. It is one of the best kept secrets in the NWA system. Great base, great airplane, great food and some good flying...and it is the best commute-jumpseat to Anchorage and Asia!

When I flew it years ago, a typical pattern had about half freighter trips and half PAX trips. We didn't call them that however. We called them freighter trips, and freighter appreciation trips. :D

Carl

OK NWA boys and girls. Looks like the FULL agreement is now posted. (JCBA)

It's only 54 pages, which has me worried. My thinking is that scope and furlough protection should be 54 pages each to be effective. Just kidding (but not really) :)

I've never voted yes for an agreement. Is it really possible I will like this one? If I find myself on the same side as Bucking Bar after reading this, I may be unconscious for a few days.

So anyway, I'm going in. Wish me luck.

New K Now

OK NWA boys and girls. Looks like the FULL agreement is now posted. (JCBA)

It's only 54 pages, which has me worried. My thinking is that scope and furlough protection should be 54 pages each to be effective. Just kidding (but not really) :)

I've never voted yes for an agreement. Is it really possible I will like this one? If I find myself on the same side as Bucking Bar after reading this, I may be unconscious for a few days.

So anyway, I'm going in. Wish me luck.

New K Now

You will need the current DAL contract to see the rest of it.