Originally Posted by
OldFlyGuy
Forcing 76 seaters to sunset...? when they are just getting them? Definitely wouldn't be cheap. How would that even happen unless DAL bought the 76 seat operators? No need to even discuss 50 seat as I'm pretty sure they are self destructing. Mgmt may want more 76 seat flexibility to help the RJ operators as the 50s go away, but that is too bad. Not my problem. Is the AS agreement out of compliance? I'm not an expert. I may not like it but how is it "abuse?" SEA is now a hub for us. Its also AS largest hub and corporate headquarters. Its certainly seems convoluted trying to limit each others operations in any agreement. AF/KLM I agree it needs fixing. But I also doubt the non compliance has cost us the bazillion jobs some think. Nevertheless, I expect a penalty and better future enforcement. I absolutely disagree with any notion we can function in this world solo. But I don't like that our JV partners always seem to need lots of big metal. And IMO DAL seems content to resell tickets. Eventually if we don't have the metal aren't we marginalized or expendable to the JV? Which puts us... solo. Hmm. UAL and AAL have better Intl venture partners than DAL IMO and it seems to be working to the "metal" benefit of all. I'm concerned about that. A lot. OFG
The final score so to speak was Delta came in at 46.9 or 47.0 of the EASK between us and AF/KLM/Alitalia. The requirement was 48.5. That works out on a departure basis to about 55% of the flights.
DALPA has stated consistently contrary to Carl's post that they would file a grievance as soon as they legally could. The filed that grievance almost to the day it was allowed. At a ATL pub meeting the chairman stated it would not be rolled into the contract. Time will tell if that proves to be correct.