Originally Posted by
Sunvox
This thread is a classic example of how misinformation starts. You guys are 100% wrong about the scope issue both at Delta and United.
The Scope clause in the UAL TA is a huge blow to regionals and will result in an enormous reduction of UAX flying, and not gonna get into it, but is anyone following the reality of Delta flying. All the 50 seaters are going or are already gone and there will be a net loss of 5000+ seats for Delta Express whilst Delta ordered 717s and is negotiating for 76 seaters to be used by it's feeders.
Sorry for the intrusion, I'm a DAL guy.
Remember, 50 seaters are uneconomical, unpopular and unwanted. 76 seaters on the other hand are more economical, more popular and wanted.
So on our TA instead of making the company choke on 50 seaters and holding the line on 76 seaters we bought into a TA where DAL said 50 seaters will go away in mass and we'll buy all the 717s SWA never wanted anyways
IF you allow us to have 70 more jumbo RJs (325 total).
and btw it's "the only way" to get rid of 50 seaters and get 717s. Plus we'll add a ratio to protect you.
Problem is that ratio might not be where it needs to be to protect pilots. See in the previous contract we had a requirement that in order to increase 76 seaters the mainline fleet had to grow to equal NWA+DAL in 2008. We struck that requirement out and went with a straight ratio under the guise that it'd increase our share of our NB domestic block hour flying from around 51% to 63% or something. But, there's your problem, 63% of what?
The min ratio does not take into account the addition of 717s. Rather, as long as DCI drops from 600 or so planes to 450 (max per the TA once additional 76 seaters are added) the min ratio is met. The 717s just push us way above the min ratio, which is good, but staying that far above it is certainly not a requirement. Thus, we left ourselves exposed to having our side cut first in a way the hull requirement or a block hour requirement would not have.
You'll see people counter that argument by saying they could've pump n dumped with the old contract. Meaning, they could have increased from 722 or so planes to nearly 800 airplanes so as to increase 76 seaters to be 100% of all 255 51+ seaters and then dumped back to where we are. It's a nonsensical strategy because it'd cost a fortune to pull it off. Instead what Delta got was the removal of the pump language and added the ability to dump planes now if they want plus they got that cap raised from 255 to 325.
Also, now there are rumors we might add additional Airbi' to the fleet and in that deal Airbus will supposedly take some of the remaining 50 seaters off our hands. So there are ways to get rid of 50 seaters without adding 76 seaters and raising caps.
I don't know. I think the most important thing is that pilots stay out of the mainline aircraft acquisition business. We shouldn't be buying our own jets via scope sales. Ratios are good but they have to be a complement to hull requirements. And I could care less how many seats are cut out of DCI, the most important thing to me is shift the flying back to mainline and get regionals back to being "regional". Dash 8-100s are fine, EMB-175s are not.
Just my two cents but when it comes to increasing the size of the 51+ seat outsourced flying...
