130av8er

I was wondering, how are the votes actually tallied and certified. I'm a no vote on this POS 12 and honestly don't trust ALPA at all.

I remember hearing it said, "It's not the voter who counts, it's the counter."

JungleBus

Yeah, I agree there's a lot in section 1 that needs taken care of, not just small-jet scope. I tend to focus on that because that's the segment of the industry I've seen most thus far. I'm interested in hearing more about the JV language in this T/A from the likes of georget, he seems to have a really good handle on that stuff.

True. The lessors are the easy part. I'm gaining a whole new respect for Jerry over at Skywest negotiating lucrative, bulletproof long-term contracts for his 50 seat flying 7 or 8 years ago. There's definitely some low-hanging fruit under the current contract. Comair still has 11 50-seaters (or thereabouts, not sure on the exact number now). Delta is in possession of a bankrupt Pinnacle Holdings and could likely get that contract terminated if they chose. There's nearly 140 there. Republic has 20-something ERJs on a fairly short-term contract; the termination language was just posted in another thread and its quite loose, mostly requiring Delta to provide sufficient notification. Point being, Delta could already be killing 50-seaters under the current contract (and have in fact been doing it with Comair and Mesa).

I'm not livid, I've tried to see the upside to this, as there are a number of posters (several of whom I've met in real life) who I really respect and know to be smart people (and scope hawks) who are pretty satisfied with this Section 1. Guys like 80kts, BuckingBar, ACL, johnson29, and yourself. And I get your guys' reasoning. Park far more 50s than the additional 76s you allow, offset the decreased ASMs with 717s at mainline, stem the DCI tide and turn it the other way. And honestly if I thought the current DCI model was sustainable I would agree with you. But it's not, it's a failing model, outsourcing is becoming unsustainable, and I don't think you should do anything to reverse that trend. In the absence of scope relief I believe Delta will do everything and anything to rid themselves of 50 seaters that are costing them money; the Mesa punt-to-JFK, termination, and subsequent lawsuit showed that. I believe you'll still get 717s as a lower-CASM replacement for terminated regional feed. But I can certainly see where reasonable people can differ on the what-if game.

Thanks for the good discussion.

johnso29

Then what fear do you have in voting YES, if they'll just add them anyway?

acl65pilot

Ballot Point. It is certified by many parties.

newKnow

Even if it is hard capped at 325, all I know is that 325 is a lot.

boog123

When does it happen?

JungleBus

A month ago, we were all in pretty unanimous agreement that 255 was way too freaking many.

acl65pilot

One thing you guys must at least consider with DCI, we need the feed and 117 seat jets cannot do all of it. The Cseries could, but it is a few years to market. For the near term(3-8 yrs) we need lift or we will lack a domestic feed network and go the way of Pan Am.

No one likes the RJ sales, no one, but as Sink said, there is a broader picture on this issue. There are many really good items in Section 1. I also agree that the costing of them is probably not in our favor. Out of all of the fears that many had, some came true in section 1, but so did the quids.

In the rest of the agreement, I have not talked to one pilot that has their expectations met, even with the expectation RA created with a expedited process and an agreement prior the amendable date. It comes down to if you are OK with the work rule and compensation scheme changes in the current TA or not.

johnso29

Labor Disputes

a. There will be no increased use of the DL code (i.e., an increase over and above that which was loaded in Deltamatic in the 90-day period prior to the commencement of the cooling off period) by AF, KLM, or AZ during a cooling off period (under 7 Section 5, 6, or 10 of the Railway Labor Act) applicable to Delta pilots. In the event of a lawful primary strike against Delta by the Delta pilots, the DL code will not be used by AF, KLM, or AZ at any time during such strike.

b. There will be no payments other than those payments occurring during the ordinary course of business to Delta from AF, KLM, or AZ during a cooling off period (under Section 5, 6, or 10 of the Railway Labor Act) applicable to Delta pilots or a lawful strike by Delta pilots.

c. No airman trained by AF, KLM, or AZ in the prior 12 months will be hired to serve as a Delta pilot during a cooling off period (under Section 5, 6 or 10 of the Railway Labor Act) applicable to Delta pilots or a lawful strike by Delta pilots.

d. There will be no increased use of the AF, KLM, and/or AZ code (i.e., an increase over and above that which was loaded in Deltamatic in the 90-day period prior to the commencement of the strike) by Delta during a lawful strike by the AF, KLM, and/or AZ airmen.

e. Without the consent of the Delta MEC Chairman, there will be no increase of gauge on any Delta route which carries the AF, KLM, and/or AZ code (i.e., an increase over and above that which was loaded in Deltamatic in the 90-day period prior to the commencement of the strike) during a lawful strike by the AF, KLM, and/or AZ airmen.

9. Definitions for the terms EASK, acquisition and competing operations contained in the 27 AF/KL/AZ JV agreement that are incorporated by reference into this LOAthe PWA shall 28 not be amended without the consent of the Delta MEC. The baseline EASK allocation, 29 the Bundle 1 definition and the competing operations capacity limit may not be changed 30 except as provided in Section 1 P. 4. and Section 1 P. 7., respectively.

TheManager

Remember, they can have as many RJ as they want today, as long as we fly them.

I see nothing wrong with that. Might want to ask management what there plan b is as it has been revealed that they ordered these extra RJs late last year.