Airline Pilot Central Forums - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)

- - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/36912-any-latest-greatest-about-delta.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maddoggin (Post 1196393)

Does this TA fix the reserves not crediting the same amount for the same trip flown by a lineholder. I've been looking for it but can't seem to find it.

No. No change. It sucks for reserves.

Is the TA on the ALPA website?

Is anyone having trouble logging in to the site?

Quote:

Originally Posted by seamonster (Post 1196431)

Is the TA on the ALPA website?

Is anyone having trouble logging in to the site?

try doing your password in all caps

There are all kinds of little things that were not addressed. For instance, the coach DH issue with SIN-NRT. (I think that's the city pair.) I will never fly international again, but I think this should have been changed. It sucks for the guys doing it. I looked for it and couldn't find any change.

http://ts2.mm.bing.net/images/thumbn...260a3cfca6f528

That's the new contract. All kinds of holes that didn't get plugged.

Thanks to FTB for crystallizing my thought process. We need to change our mindset/negotiating strategy. We HAVE to stop negotiating for the good times and negotiate for the bad. If that entails giving up profit sharing then so be it.

Since deregulation how many concessionary contracts have airlines had? How many positive contracts have we had and what was their time duration?

We don't end up negotiating for the long term good, only for the short term. When things go bad, they have and they will, we end up giving back. We give back hourly rates and when they can't take anymore of our pay, they take our pensions, our work rules and our scope.

They CAN'T take our pensions anymore, they CAN take our scope. By ALLOWING the company MORE large, new, cost efficient RJ's in return for ratios, we are playing Russian roulette. It is ONLY a matter of time before the next economic/company financial downturn.

Force Majeure, they can't reduce OUR block hours AND GIVE them to the regionals if they DON'T have the airframes!!!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by orvil (Post 1196433)

So is it coach to NRT?

Quote:

Originally Posted by alfaromeo (Post 1196248)

Math Problem for the Day (I hope newk has recovered from his analysis of the staffing formula)

Delta currently flies about 3,600,000 domestic block hours per year (combined mainline + DCI).

Our current share of those block hours is 53.9%
Under the TA, if Delta purchases the extra 70 76 seat jets the minimum share of our block hours rises to 60.9%. Calculate the difference between our current share and our minimum new share.
Divide that difference by 12 to get the monthly block hours.
Multiply that number by 2 because we have two pilots per domestic cockpit.
Divide by 60 whcih is what our block hours per pilot will be in the future.
Tell me how many additional pilot jobs at mainline that this creates
Now contemplate that with a hard cap on DCI fleet, where does all additonal system capacity growth have to go after that.

Mr. JungleBus claims that they can buy the 76 seaters and then dump mainline aircraft. How can they do that and still increase the mainline share of block hours? That is why there is the ratio built in, and it is a very powerful ratio that you will never see again under a new negotiation. Management felt like we took their children when this was negotiated. Block hours are the core of pilot jobs, the number of aircraft required to create those block hours are basically fixed by the average daily ute rate of aircraft.

Bonus question: Under Delta's business plan our share of block hours will rise to 64% (remember DCI fleet is capped). Redo the above calculations and tell me how many jobs that creates at mainline.

oooooh. there is some good data to play with here and I am! :D

Now, I've got other things to do but one nagging thing that comes up as I dissect the fun numbers. Why did we allow all domestic NB aircraft from the DC9 to 763 count in this TA towards the mainline block hours? Why not just use small NB?

I know we have some long legs on the RJs but 85% have to be under 900sm. So for the most part they're nowhere near as long as our 763s, 738s, 737s.

Even with the ratio, you can get to the point that we're flying 1.9 million block hours and they're down around 1.2 million. rounding here. Divide that out by an average flight segments. If we fly 2.5 hours/segment on average and they do 1.2 average, they get to do 35% more segments then we do.

And I have a sneaking suspicion it might be more than 2.5 ABH for us but whatever it is I bet we average more hours per segment than an RJ.

Honest question, why wasn't flight segments the measuring stick instead of block hours? because surely the long range NBs do not help.

On the short to medium range flights it seems flight segments is a better measuring stick.

Also by the math, seems we do a lot more hours per plane than they do. Is that because they do more short segments?

ALPA site still chewing on log on info. I assume it is because of the TA.

Another good comment from the DALPA forums.

Quote:

It was the only way management was going to get more scope erosion accomplished. Have the pilots trade 50 seaters that management no longer wants in such larger numbers for more viable aircraft, 70 of the 76 seaters to be exact. Give ratios that management was not concerned about and carrot with a purchase order.

When the line keeps moving toward getting more of our biggest RJs, it is scope erosion even if it requires a reduction of smaller aircraft and ratios to ensure lower levels of DCI. Delta only has 16 turboprops left in DCI, remember when they had hundreds? What if years ago we made a deal to reduce the amount turboprops in a trade for moving the line even closer toward more of larger mainline like equipment? How would we then rate our success now with such a deal?

This deal is a scope concession and part of an ongoing trend of further scope erosion pure and simple. It is just being masked as something different to make more palatable.

No Thanks,

No ask yourself why we are even having discussions of giving up 70 more of our largest branded outsourced aircraft in a non-concessionary TA?

Quote:

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1196341)

T, what's the current cap on 51-76 seaters in our PWA? 255?

What can the cap rise to under the TA? 325?

Did the cap go up? Yes.

Why wouldn't it go up again in 2015?

255 is the hard limit. Till 325 became the limit. 325 is the limit till...

Why wouldn't it? Maybe because we won't have to fix as many huge loopholes in section 1 next time because we bit the bullet this time and fixed a lot of problems. We'll already have downside protection with the ratios and we'll have cleaned up a lot of the JV language. So, at that point, the only reason the cap might go up again is if the pilot group decides they want to trade more scope for pay raises and I would certainly hope we've learned our lesson on that one.

I'm sure we'd all love to fix our section 1 problems without giving up another 76 seater but that requires both sides to agree on it and anyone with the slightest bit of common sense knows that isn't going to happen here in the real world.