Originally Posted by
Rogue24
Delta Council 54
April 6, 2012
Contract Status Report
I heard that the company wants more 76-seat aircraft at the DCI carriers.
It seems that in every contract we have seen, the Company asks to loosen scope. While we won’t discuss ongoing negotiations, the MEC is committed to achieving significant improvements throughout our scope language. Right now under the current PWA, Delta can increase the number of 76-seat RJs (subject to the 255 limit of 70/76-seat jets) by growing beyond 767 mainline aircraft. We do not support any larger aircraft at DCI, jet, turbofan, or turboprop. Below is the following language from the PWA found on
1-5 section 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 October 30, 2008. 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 October 30, 2008, 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. (Due to a grievance settlement in January of 2009, the 76 seat limit is set at 153, not 120.)
What they deliberately fail to mention is that the Company is already at the 255 jet limit. This is the number the Company wants (needs) raised.
Originally Posted by
tsquare
... I am not necessarily opposed to certain conditions for it as I have said before. For example (and this is only a what if): Would you be opposed to allowing the 76 seaters to go to 80 seats if all the 50 seaters were to be removed from the inventory immediately upon signing, a reduction of those 80 seaters from 255 to 200 and a signed purchase of a 100 seat airframe that would go to mainline? I don't know if I would say no to something like that.
I can guarantee you Delta is not going to agree to a reduction to 200 aircraft. That's 1.6 Billion Dollars in nearly new RJ's that would have to be parked without another apparent operator to instantly take up the payments. But for the purpose of your example, lets run with it.
76 to 80 seats would on the surface appear to be just a 5% increase in revenue. Look beyond that to CASM and you see that the Next Gen CRJ would then have a CASM lower than just about any narrow body jet currently in Delta service. You would be allowing management equipment that would ensure Delta pilots were the Company's last choice when awarding flying. Worst off all, your proposal would be re-defining what a Delta pilot is and drawing the circle every smaller ... you would, by definition, be reducing what Delta pilots fly.
Further, your proposal would be further endorsing a program of outsourcing to non union, alter ego, replacement pilots, the likes of the Teamsters at GoJets and at union hating SkyWest. Your proposal would also continue with the dilution of Delta pilot negotiating leverage since other pilots would be performing what had been defined as "mainline" flying.
If such a proposal were proffered, I would vote no, encourage everyone to vote no, and preemptively retain defense Counsel.