Originally Posted by
vprMatrix
....as they say, a contract is a contract, however Delta seems better than most at getting around theirs.
A contract is a contract...man that brings up bad memories. Any lessons to be learned from the rest of your statment?
Originally Posted by
vprMatrix
Why will Delta spend money on a product it doesn't want? Do you think that's their only other option to this TA?
As I said previously, it's not their only option. Delta can proceed with us or without us. Some guys here think Delta's only option is with us. Why would management spend more money than they want/have to if Delta has options?
Originally Posted by
vprMatrix
ALPA is saying that Delta will start spending money on heavy checks and just keep all the gas guzzling 50 seats that our passengers dislike around. Delta is up against a wall with the >50 seat aircraft and is not likely to park CRJ-700s in order to buy CRJ-900s. Even if they did there can only be 255 total not 325 and mainline aircraft would have to actually grow a lot thanks to our grievance settlement. They are however, likely to park 50 seats at every opportunity they make available. Delta has already proven that it can play hard ball with its regional carriers and is in full control of shaping Pinnacle's restructuring which it helped bring about.
ALPA has never said that Delta will keep
all of the 50 seaters. Delta has a path without us and will significantly shrink the number of DCI 50 seaters. That path is slower and has additional risk, but doesn't reduce the 50 seat count nearly as low as the TA. They've already laid the groundwork for keeping 50 seat flying (PCL bankruptcy agreement) and have started a CF-34 engine lease program from other airline previously grounded CRJ-100/200 to delay/defer maintenance on Delta engines.
I don't recall if you were one of the ones worried about "pump and dump", but our current PWA would allow Delta management to do that much more easily as it doesn't have a block hour ratio. Also, 737-900's aren't included as small narrowbody a/c in our TA (just B717/A319), under the current PWA it doesn't matter what the a/c is. Over the next 3 years we have 170+ aircraft announced for delivery. We only need to increase fleet size by about 70 aircraft for Delta to convert 70 to 76 seaters. The 70 seaters begin coming off lease at the end of 2014.
Remember, Delta has multi-party deals going on. They need new/revised contracts from Bombardier and/or Embraer, GE, the development banks of Canada and/or Brazil and various DCI carriers to get to where they want to be. We're the quickest path to get leverage on all those players simultaneously, but management still has leverage without us.
The manufacturers need to produce aircraft (look at their order backlogs). The countries where those manufacturers are based and the aircraft are financed need jobs.
Originally Posted by
vprMatrix
If Delta reinvest in the CRJ-200s they are committing to poor service with a crappy airplane for another decade. Our management team is much smarter than that and this is not just an A or B scenario but that is what we (the pilots) are being told by ALPA. (IMO)
As described above, management has options. You seem to be thinking in a binary manner when it comes to DAL/ALPA but recognize their flexibility when it comes to DCI. I get that you don't like the result of this TA. What I don't get is the difference in your logic and argument when it's about your company and contract and not somebody else.