Originally Posted by
gloopy
50 seat scope recapture is free in proportion to the amounts being parked anyway. Its our flying to begin with, the company doesn't want to outsource a large percentage of that segment anymore, so them "putting a price on it" when SWA allows zero would be a pretty hostile non NMB friendly tactic.
76 seaters have to go. SWA allows zero. These can go on day one by pulling seats. For each of the 6 seats management squeals over, we can squeal over the other 70.
As for 70 (and 65) seaters they need to be phased out as contracts expire unless the company does something hostile like signing ultra long term agreements in the interim, in which case the company needs to eat those agreements. Contrary to legend and lore, they aren't really that expensive to break as most merely say that if we break them, we have to take over the payments on the metal...the same payments we are making for them in the first place. That's what happened when we fired ACA (before we bribed Mesa to take over the payments for us, even though we then paid them 100% of the cost to do so) and is standard in every DCI agreement I've seen.
I think in 5-10 years the company will still want hundreds of 70-76 seaters. And they would LOVE one gauge up, which we can give them no problem, in unlimited numbers with no route or weight restrictions...as long as we fly them on our list under our contract like everything else.
If anything currenntly being outsourced isn't "viable" then we really need to get that scope back while its not beneficial to outsource to begin with. SWA plus reasonable premiums includes scope so any outsourcing (after across the board significant reductions) the company wishes to continue to keep will cost them very significant additional premiums. If they want to keep 50 or 70 seat outsourcing that they don't think is viable and plan on parking anyway, let them pay us to allow it (after massive reductions in either case of course).
That way they can bargain with themselves.
I like your post.
I put in the survey I no longer want DCI painted like Delta nor to be called Delta Connection and I want a max range for the aircraft. Want 255 76 seaters? Go for it.
But change the following in Section 1.D:
4. At least 85% of all category A and category C operations each month will be under 900 statute miles. Change to read 200 miles. Put the regional back in regional aircraft.
6. No more than 6% of category A and category C operations each month will be between Delta hubs (as defined in Section 1 D. 5.). For purposes of Section 1 D. 6., Delta Connection flying operated between FLL and TPA, FLL and MCO, TPA and MCO will not be considered flying between Delta hubs. Read this to say no more than 0% of flying may be conducted by non-Delta seniority pilots each month between...
7. Delta Connection flying aircraft will only bear the name “Delta” as part of a phrase referencing a Connection-type operation. Read this to say no Delta Connection aircraft may bear the name "Delta" nor use the Delta paint scheme.
That's just an idea. The ramifications I'm not going to bother to study at this hour because really I'm supposed to be tiling a shower floor.