Originally Posted by
forgot to bid
So with RAH purchasing 80 C-Series, isn't it about @#%)(@#*$ time Delta parks outsourced carriers so as to stop funding the creation of a major competitor?
Just saying. It's getting pretty old with RAH.
Yes it is. But who said those airplanes are intended for the competition?
Originally Posted by Bombardier (Guppy and MD88 killer salesman
The CS300 jet, the larger of the company's two CSeries jets, comes with 130 seats. It's billed as being less noisy than rival jets, has transcontinental range, or 2,950 nautical miles, and burns 20% less fuel than its competitors. Bombardier estimates that, over the next 20 years, 6,300 airlines in the 100-149 seat segment will need to be replaced.
"It shows that there's momentum" to replace aging fleets, says Ben Boehm, vice president of Bombardier's commercial aircraft program.
We are very close to being back in negotiations and our own official publications from my LEC tell me things, in bold like:
Originally Posted by ROAR from 44, Winter 2010, Page 10 center
With the differences in small jet contracts, are we prepared to delay the nest recovery contract in mediation over (scope) where the business case of flying RJ's at mainline is questionable at best?
That question is answered:
“Since RJ flying is not higher paying, adding thousands of jobs to the bottom of the seniority list that are paid significantly less than mainline jobs can never be described as movement. The real answer is to expand the number of standard mainline aircraft … . Rather than fight a protracted, risky, and costly war on our property to gain exclusivity of flying, why not simply strengthen flow though agreements”
... or Welcome to Compass/Republic/Mesaba First Officer Bucking Bar. What was flying that Boeing like? Well this is how we do things here.
The problem is with the economic analysis of what is a "standard mainline aircraft." As we have seen that definition moves all over the place. From 66 seat DC9's to 99 seat E170's.
Until we wrestle our union away from a economic analysis of job security to a view that every union member's job is equally important we are not going to stop this horse trading of job security and advancement for another pilots percieved (not real) pay benefit.
Delta is on record saying it's priority is cleaning up its balance sheet and reducing debt. It aint buying a large number of jets, yet. When it does buy, it will probably be fully tasked with the need to renew the 767, 757, and 747 fleets. We will probably hear our employer lacks the money for a narrow body replacement. But our partners, like SkyWest & Republic, have plenty of money and are eager to spend it, 'oh and by the way they are non-ALPA.
ALPA seems oblivious to the fact that its facilitation of outsourcing seriously erodes its power. ALPA should immediately claim its exclusivity over Delta flying. If it flies it should have an ALPA crew and preferably a Delta crew.
What is the difference between Republic leasing a jet from Bombardier and being contracted by Delta, and Delta leasing that jet itself? Why do we care? As a union we should simply take the position "We fly airplanes, We don't buy them." If it operates in Delta colors then it is flown by a Delta pilot and we don't care if Republic leases it, you lease it, or that fat dude on LOST buys the airplane with lottery winnings... we fly it.