Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-22-2012, 12:22 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Originally Posted by tsquare
But not until after 2014, right? That is when the snapshot is taken...
05-22-2012, 12:24 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
Originally Posted by slowplay
Going off memory here, so don't smack me too hard if I've got a piece of data wrong. I'm going to be (hopefully) off the grid tomorrow so I'll look this stuff up Thursday.
The changes to reserve were part of a package, and that package has some job protections in it. First is the ALV. Once you've reached it you can't be assigned more flying. If you're under it you can be assigned ALV +15. But that is limited by the staffing formula, as it requires jobs to be added when reserves are used more than 60 hours per month on average. Another protection is the 6 additional scheduled X days per year, increasing to up to 18 additional for categories staffed at over 20%.
Bottom line, with the additional time off and the staffing formula as a backdrop, there's no way to run reserves at ALV + 15 for any length of time.
The changes to reserve were part of a package, and that package has some job protections in it. First is the ALV. Once you've reached it you can't be assigned more flying. If you're under it you can be assigned ALV +15. But that is limited by the staffing formula, as it requires jobs to be added when reserves are used more than 60 hours per month on average. Another protection is the 6 additional scheduled X days per year, increasing to up to 18 additional for categories staffed at over 20%.
Bottom line, with the additional time off and the staffing formula as a backdrop, there's no way to run reserves at ALV + 15 for any length of time.
05-22-2012, 12:28 PM
Line Holder
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: DAL 7ER FO
Posts: 98
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
Slow- care to address the exemption on page 1-7, lines 1-3 (note 2)?
14. “Circumstance over which the Company does not have control,” for the purposes of
28
28
Section 1, means a circumstance that includes, but is not limited to, a natural disaster;
29 labor dispute; grounding of a substantial number of the Company’s aircraft by a
30 government agency; reduction in flying operations because of a decrease in available fuel
31 supply or other critical materials due to either governmental action or commercial
32 suppliers being unable to provide sufficient fuel or other critical materials for the
33 Company’s operations; revocation of the Company’s operating certificate(s); war
34 emergency; owner’s delay in delivery of aircraft scheduled for delivery; manufacturer’s
35 delay in delivery of new aircraft scheduled for delivery. The term “circumstance over
36 which the Company does not have control” will not include the price of fuel or other
37 supplies, the price of aircraft, the state of the economy, the financial state of the
38 Company, or the relative profitability or unprofitability of the Company’s then-current
29 labor dispute; grounding of a substantial number of the Company’s aircraft by a
30 government agency; reduction in flying operations because of a decrease in available fuel
31 supply or other critical materials due to either governmental action or commercial
32 suppliers being unable to provide sufficient fuel or other critical materials for the
33 Company’s operations; revocation of the Company’s operating certificate(s); war
34 emergency; owner’s delay in delivery of aircraft scheduled for delivery; manufacturer’s
35 delay in delivery of new aircraft scheduled for delivery. The term “circumstance over
36 which the Company does not have control” will not include the price of fuel or other
37 supplies, the price of aircraft, the state of the economy, the financial state of the
38 Company, or the relative profitability or unprofitability of the Company’s then-current
39 operations.
05-22-2012, 12:30 PM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Originally Posted by slowplay
The intent was to capture domestic flying, and the 767-300 non ER type is a domestic aircraft. So if those block hours go away without replacement, DCI has to shrink even more under the block hour ratio.
Originally Posted by slowplay
Going off memory here, so don't smack me too hard if I've got a piece of data wrong. I'm going to be (hopefully) off the grid tomorrow so I'll look this stuff up Thursday.
The changes to reserve were part of a package, and that package has some job protections in it. First is the ALV. Once you've reached it you can't be assigned more flying. If you're under it you can be assigned ALV +15. But that is limited by the staffing formula, as it requires jobs to be added when reserves are used more than 60 hours per month on average. Another protection is the 6 additional scheduled X days per year, increasing to up to 18 additional for categories staffed at over 20%.
Bottom line, with the additional time off and the staffing formula as a backdrop, there's no way to run reserves at ALV + 15 for any length of time.
The changes to reserve were part of a package, and that package has some job protections in it. First is the ALV. Once you've reached it you can't be assigned more flying. If you're under it you can be assigned ALV +15. But that is limited by the staffing formula, as it requires jobs to be added when reserves are used more than 60 hours per month on average. Another protection is the 6 additional scheduled X days per year, increasing to up to 18 additional for categories staffed at over 20%.
Bottom line, with the additional time off and the staffing formula as a backdrop, there's no way to run reserves at ALV + 15 for any length of time.
Originally Posted by slowplay
Not exactly...it's an aircraft delivery (event based) as well as time based ratio. If management never buys another 76 seater, then the ratio doesn't come into play. If they buy all 70 allowable, then they have to have 88 small narrowbody aircraft on the property, 125 50 seaters left, and a max of 450 total DCI left. Then they do the ratio and ensure that for every block hour DCI flies mainline has at least 1.56. It's planned to be over 1.7.
Thanks for the clarification. This helps a lot.
05-22-2012, 12:32 PM
*********
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,068
Originally Posted by newKnow
Seriously. ALV could be 82 hours. Can they really have a reserve fly 97 hours?? 
Basically, the most they could ever consistently fly you (once the new rules are in place) is 83 hours. There could be heavy months (90+ hours) but there would have to be lighter months down the line to keep you legal.
Just commentary. Non-voter here, and this tidbit has nothing to do with the fact that I think the TA is unsatisfactory.
05-22-2012, 12:33 PM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by slowplay
Not exactly...it's an aircraft delivery (event based) as well as time based ratio. If management never buys another 76 seater, then the ratio doesn't come into play. If they buy all 70 allowable, then they have to have 88 small narrowbody aircraft on the property, 125 50 seaters left, and a max of 450 total DCI left. Then they do the ratio and ensure that for every block hour DCI flies mainline has at least 1.56. It's planned to be over 1.7.
I still don't see any way that we are guaranteed that more flying isn't transferred to DCI other than that based on a "plan" That worries me.
Sections 1.D.5 and 6 directly transfer flying to DCI, there is no way to spin that otherwise. 90% requirement that those airplanes fly into and out of hubs... yet no more than 6% between hubs... All those AGS/BHM/TLH type of routes will henceforth be handled by DCI. Book it. What will be the need for a 100 seat airplane?
05-22-2012, 12:47 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Posts: 403
WHEREAS, this is apparently a two-pronged approach to coerce the Delta pilots into selling scope, and
WHEREAS, the senior pilots were supposed to be tempted yesterday by the (albeit paltry) pay increase, and
WHEREAS, the junior pilots were supposed to be tempted today by the promise of 717s to replace the jets Delta has already parked,
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that we will not be fooled by management's carrot, which they have been peeling since they found out about the Airtran merger. Some guys saw them tying it on the stick yesterday, and in the midst of our constant braying about the terrible TA, they have put the stick out in front of us. It's not changing my vote!
WHEREAS, the senior pilots were supposed to be tempted yesterday by the (albeit paltry) pay increase, and
WHEREAS, the junior pilots were supposed to be tempted today by the promise of 717s to replace the jets Delta has already parked,
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that we will not be fooled by management's carrot, which they have been peeling since they found out about the Airtran merger. Some guys saw them tying it on the stick yesterday, and in the midst of our constant braying about the terrible TA, they have put the stick out in front of us. It's not changing my vote!
05-22-2012, 12:47 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,539
Originally Posted by tsquare
I still don't see any way that we are guaranteed that more flying isn't transferred to DCI other than that based on a "plan" That worries me.
Sections 1.D.5 and 6 directly transfer flying to DCI, there is no way to spin that otherwise. 90% requirement that those airplanes fly into and out of hubs... yet no more than 6% between hubs... All those AGS/BHM/TLH type of routes will henceforth be handled by DCI. Book it. What will be the need for a 100 seat airplane?
Sections 1.D.5 and 6 directly transfer flying to DCI, there is no way to spin that otherwise. 90% requirement that those airplanes fly into and out of hubs... yet no more than 6% between hubs... All those AGS/BHM/TLH type of routes will henceforth be handled by DCI. Book it. What will be the need for a 100 seat airplane?
This deal is going to take mainline's share of domestic block hours from 54% to a minimum of 61%. If management executes on the business plan the share will actually be 64% mainline to DCI's 36%.
Oh, I suspect you'll see some of the city pairs you mentioned on a small narrowbody aircraft. Look at the historical ATL-DC9 bid packages for some more routes we may see come to the mainline. NewYork LGA is also a place ripe for upgauging, as it is slot constrained.
Did anybody notice the all-mainline LGA growth announcement on Monday...maybe that slot swap was good for us after all.
05-22-2012, 12:50 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: A big one that looks like a little one
Posts: 633
Originally Posted by JungleBus
I have a question. How hard is it to get info on which 50 seater leases Delta has assumed or renewed, when, and for how long? It seems to me some of these leases are ridiculously long, and it's been known for quite a while that 50 seaters are inefficient and DL has a glut of them. Is it possible that Delta intentionally leased too many 50 seaters for too long, knowing they could parlay those aircraft into the big RJ's they really wanted? This TA has been a long time in the making even though DAL is making it seem very rush-rush now. I'm guessing the 50-for-76 swap has been a management wet dream since the jcba, if not since BK.
05-22-2012, 12:51 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,273
Originally Posted by Waves
Big wide body order soon. Yeah whatever! I've been hearing this one for over twenty years. Don't count on it, and don't let let it affect your vote. I think if there were going to be an order, now would be the time to tell us.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
