Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-24-2012, 04:15 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: Just happy to be here Boss!
Posts: 200
Originally Posted by bohicagain
If this TA is approved and the next TA in 2015 has a cap 400DCI airplanes but all of them 76 seats would you guys approve that also with a modest 4% per year increase? At what point is enough is enough.
I currently fly one of these 76 seat jets (E75) and these jets should be at flown by Delta pilots. No excuse. I have a trip next month. SLC-SNA-SLC-MCI-DTW in 1 day. These jets are no longer a regional jet like in the past but a very comfortable jet with less people. The only thing different from a paxs perspective is no safety video
I currently fly one of these 76 seat jets (E75) and these jets should be at flown by Delta pilots. No excuse. I have a trip next month. SLC-SNA-SLC-MCI-DTW in 1 day. These jets are no longer a regional jet like in the past but a very comfortable jet with less people. The only thing different from a paxs perspective is no safety video
05-24-2012, 04:31 PM
Banned
Joined APC: Jan 2012
Position: DAL
Posts: 623
Why are we allowing DALPA to compare this contract in terms of the 2008 bankruptcy-ish rates?
What is so magical about 2008? I'd expect the company to choose that year.
But if "our" union is picking a year to benchmark, why on earth not pick C2K?
What is so magical about 2008? I'd expect the company to choose that year.
But if "our" union is picking a year to benchmark, why on earth not pick C2K?
05-24-2012, 04:31 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: Just happy to be here Boss!
Posts: 200
TA also has a block hour ratio which grows in DAL pilots favor with each 76. This prevents adding the new ML frames only to dump others...the new ML jets must be growth.
05-24-2012, 04:37 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Position: Nice while it lasted
Posts: 326
Originally Posted by ITSALLGOOD
Uh...no. That would result in an addition of 1300 seats to DCI and you don't mention tying those 76s to added mainline jets...TA reduces dci seats by 5600 and requires 1.25 new ML jets for every 76. Your hypothetical is in no way similar to our TA.
Last edited by JobHopper; 05-24-2012 at 04:41 PM. Reason: spelling
05-24-2012, 05:04 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 852
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
3. The jury is WAY OUT on the whole prospect of whether any attempt by our union to force another union to lose jobs based on a contract that they didn't sign, would even be legal. It would certainly produce a DFR against ALPA by the agrieved RJ airline, and could well produce a lawsuit against DAL for violating the Railway Labor Act. This is competely unsettled law here. None of us are in any position to feel confident about the language that appears to force ANOTHER AIRLINE to reduce their RJ count or the block hours they fly those RJ's.
05-24-2012, 05:06 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 852
Originally Posted by More Bacon
Why are we allowing DALPA to compare this contract in terms of the 2008 bankruptcy-ish rates?
What is so magical about 2008? I'd expect the company to choose that year.
But if "our" union is picking a year to benchmark, why on earth not pick C2K?
What is so magical about 2008? I'd expect the company to choose that year.
But if "our" union is picking a year to benchmark, why on earth not pick C2K?
05-24-2012, 05:13 PM
Banned
Joined APC: Jan 2012
Position: DAL
Posts: 623
Originally Posted by Karnak
Because our current contract started then. We merged then. It was our last comprehensive negotiation.
05-24-2012, 05:22 PM
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
3. The jury is WAY OUT on the whole prospect of whether any attempt by our union to force another union to lose jobs based on a contract that they didn't sign, would even be legal. It would certainly produce a DFR against ALPA by the agrieved RJ airline, and could well produce a lawsuit against DAL for violating the Railway Labor Act. This is competely unsettled law here. None of us are in any position to feel confident about the language that appears to force ANOTHER AIRLINE to reduce their RJ count or the block hours they fly those RJ's.
Originally Posted by Karnak
We need to bookmark this one for when you resurrect the DPA's claim that ALPA kowtows to the Regionals. The TA shows that each MEC negotiates their own Scope, with the Regionals having no say in those of the mainlines.
There is nothing in your post that responds to what I reposted above. It appears you're attempting to rekindle a DPA discussion to keep from actually discussing my post.
Carl
05-24-2012, 05:22 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 765-A
Posts: 6,844
Originally Posted by More Bacon
Are you union or management?
05-24-2012, 05:27 PM
Banned
Joined APC: Jan 2012
Position: DAL
Posts: 623
Originally Posted by newKnow
That ones too easy, bacon. I'll let it slide.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
