Originally Posted by
Bucking Bar
The ratios in Contract 2000 were based on economic assumptions which were pure nonsense. For instance:
Contract 2000 Block hour ratios:
- 34% - 2002
- 36% - 2003
- 37% - 2004
Contract 2000 ... fail points ... block hour renegotiation:
- 44% to 48% - 2002
- 50% - 2004
- Gone. Limits on 70 to 76 seat aircraft - 2006
The reason Contract 2000 Section 1 failed from nearly its inception was the complete disregard for Delta's announced fleet plans at DCI. Starting in 1999, Delta had already ordered over 500 regional jet aircraft meaning on an ~ 3 to 1 ratio the mainline fleet would have had to grown by > 1,400 jets just to keep up. That's silly.
A ratio of 1.25 to 1 (new mainline narrow body to 76 seat RJ) is much more realistic. The ratios with additional 76 seaters are aggressive:
76 seat fleet = equivalent mainline flying percentage
< 153 = Slightly below status quo
154 to 163 = 55% mainline ... approximate status quo (no gain)
164 to 173 = 62.5% mainline
174 to 183 = 65% mainline
184 to 193 = 67.5% mainline
194 to 203 = 70% mainline
204 to 213 = 73.5% mainline
214 to 223 = 78% mainline
This at least suggests to me that Delta is not going to grow the 76 seat fleet beyond 183 or 193. Can you imagine DCI cut by more than half, all the way down to 22% of block? I'm not sure I can.
What makes this different than 2000, is that Delta has not committed to the 76 seat order, so we don't exactly know what management's intentions are.
At face vale these ratios begin more realistic, appear easier to enforce and provide growth for mainline pilots.
(double check my math, hot, tired and had a two year old screaming at me ... you try doing math while a two year old screams CATNHATDADDYDADDYAIRPLANEWERISMOMMYCATINHAT ... throws cookies at kid and types frantically)
The ratios are based on now growth, so if we go above them as slow as indicated we will, mainline can still be a accumulator before DCI would be forced to.
On the point about how many 76 seat aircraft they will by an operate; What is allowed? What has DAL done before? It comes down to what "can" they do or "can" they do that with this language? Its true for a few parts of this TA. If they can do it, and its not good for this group, my radar starts pinging.
That said, I do not suspect we will see the language tested in the next three years. Going forward a new shiny ball will appear, and we will focus on that. We will hit the retirement era and DAL will not be able to operate the schedule.......Look five to ten year down the road.
Also, if the 717 leases are assumed do not forget that the first ones start to leave in 2017. If we are well above the ratio as projected, the 76 seat aircraft that you assume they will not use will be put in to service and a mainline replacement may not be necessary.
*look at the previous posts from Slow. Look at the top end ratio then look at what he says is projected. I bet we can park a 20-30 jets before we would even come close to the ratio at the top end.
Just want to give a counter perspective.