Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Closed Thread Subscribe

Page 10117 of 20173

10117

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

05-24-2012, 08:36 PM

#101161

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: 747-400 Captain

Posts: 12,487

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnso29

Carl, the current TA doesn't give one more seat or one more pound. It reduces seats and pounds.

The TA will outsource over 30,000 more seats than our current scope. The ONLY case you can make to say this TA reduces seats is if you assume RA was lying when he said the 50 seat RJ's burn far too much fuel, and the passengers overwhelmingly disapprove of them.

Carl

05-24-2012, 08:37 PM

#101162

LeineLodge

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: DAL FO

Posts: 2,146

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

Here it is:

1. Stop giving away MORE of our flying

I completely agree with you. The Block Hour Ratios significantly shift flying back to mainline.

Quote:

2. Vote this TA down

I think I see where you're going here. Let's show how tough we are! . . . Then what?

Quote:

3. Negotiate all NEW over 50 seat RJ's to be operated at Delta (even if it means some pilots will think they're on a B scale).

With what leverage? Our current scope is SO weak that Delta can operate UNLIMITED 50 seaters off our list and there is nothing we can do about it. The TA sets a hard cap of 125 50 seaters by the end of the agreement.

Quote:

4. Understand that any alleged lease forgiveness of 50 seat RJ's based on buying new larger RJ's would not care who operated the aircraft...only that they are bought.

Not true. Why would Skywest, ASA/ExpressJet, etc just let Delta pull the rug out from under them? It is the regional carriers that Delta has signed these long term deals with. Delta has to convince them somehow to let them out of their 50 seater contracts. What's their carrot?

Quote:

5. Wait until 2025 when the last older RJ burns its last Jet A.

We have nothing in our current scope section to keep them from renewing RJ leases as time goes on. 2025 will just keep getting pushed down the road.

Quote:

6. Mainline flying fully recaptured.

See my response to your #1. We have an option to shift flying back to mainline. It's not a full recapture, but it brings a whole lotta flying back to mainline, and more importantly establishes a HARD FLOOR for how much of our work Delta can outsource - something we've never had before.

05-24-2012, 08:39 PM

#101163

grasshopper

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Aug 2006

Position: C130

Posts: 303

Quote:

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

PICK ME! PICK ME! I'm back after family night and falling asleep on my daughters floor again.

So I have my answer after doing your math question, but I have a question that changes every calculation.

What will the total block hours be after we transition to 100 new 739s, 88 new 717s, 125 50 seaters and 325 large regional jets?

Seems as if everything is no neutral here. We add 100 739s but they're all replacement jets. We add 100 717s but the ASMs are supposed to stay the same.

So best guess? Because I have a table that's pretty darn wide.

Now if every 739 and 717 was growth and we only parked the DC-9s and the 763s but nothing else (as in the 739 wasn't all that much of a replacement jet) we'd be rolling in hiring over a period of a couple of years beginning 2013 or 2014.

As long as this TA doesn't kill the staffing requirement. But our block hours would have to increase all things being equal.

But if the block hours have to remain neutral at 3.6M then we have to reduce the mainline fleet.

I say that we take that hit given the age of our jets compared to the age of those RJs all sitting on long term leases. And given that the CRJ-900 CASM is mainline like or better, it seems they wouldn't park those things.

We would still need pilots to do that though.

But this is the kicker. If they decide to drop down to that 1.56 ratio (and Lord forbid ever be granted relief on it) with a neutral 3.6M hours and RJ hours remaining unchanged, we'd be stuck in neutral on hiring at best.

So it depends on where that total block hours is in years to come.

I'm tearing up.....beauty Clark.

05-24-2012, 08:40 PM

#101164

johnso29

Moderator

Joined APC: Oct 2006

Position: B757/767

Posts: 13,088

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

No it won't Carl. Do your math again.

05-24-2012, 08:43 PM

#101165

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: 747-400 Captain

Posts: 12,487

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowplay

It was asked. The MEC looked at the numbers to try and make the operation cost-competitive on mainline. It would have been a horrendous B-scale. The one-time startup costs, pilot contract costs, and other related costs completely outstripped savings on the DCI margins. We even looked at adding seats into the aircraft that were capable of higher density, and there wasn't enough revenue to offset mainline expenses at our current costs (pre-TA).

That is so disingenuous that it's nearly PURE BS. LEC resolutions have asked for this study many times and you unelected MEC bureaucrats have steadfastly refused.

Furthermore, negotiations is NOT about making us cost competitive with some bottom feeding regional. Negotiations is about first wanting something as the objective, then spending capital as necessary to make it happen. Unbelievable.

The FACT is that your MEC and sadly, MEC's before you DO NOT WANT this flying at mainline for whatever sick and twisted reason. Moak used to say that kind of flying was beneath the mainline pilot. I'm afraid that arrogant legacy lives on.

Carl

05-24-2012, 08:48 PM

#101166

Boomer

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jan 2008

Position: blueJet

Posts: 4,515

Quote:

Originally Posted by gloopy

Hire a fleet Captain, set up a training program, procure some sim time and put out an AE.

Delta already has all that, and it's in place and running today (except the AE, that is).

Unfortunately the pilots are on a separate list.

05-24-2012, 08:50 PM

#101167

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: 747-400 Captain

Posts: 12,487

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeineLodge

I completely agree with you. The Block Hour Ratios significantly shift flying back to mainline.

They will on the way up...but are legally unenforceable on the way down. If/when mainline flying drops, we (DALPA) will be in no legal position to demand this worthless language of forcing RJ airlines to reduce their block hours be enforced. The company flat won't do it, and tell us to grieve it later. The affected RJ airline certainly won't do it voluntarily, and would sue ALPA on a DFR if forced. That's the sad reality.

Carl

05-24-2012, 08:53 PM

#101168

newKnow

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Feb 2007

Position: 765-A

Posts: 6,844

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowplay

It was asked. The MEC looked at the numbers to try and make the operation cost-competitive on mainline. It would have been a horrendous B-scale. The one-time startup costs, pilot contract costs, and other related costs completely outstripped savings on the DCI margins. We even looked at adding seats into the aircraft that were capable of higher density, and there wasn't enough revenue to offset mainline expenses at our current costs (pre-TA).

Things are moving so fast, I almost missed this.

So, are you saying we could have had inroads into 70 seat flying, but someone determined the pay wasn't enough and mainline expenses were too high?

I wish they had sent that out in the TA. (Not trying to be flip. Seriously.)

05-24-2012, 08:54 PM

#101169

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: 747-400 Captain

Posts: 12,487

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeineLodge

I think I see where you're going here. Let's show how tough we are! . . . Then what?

That has nothing to do with negotiations. Negotiations are about knowing the process, and using it to your maximum advantage. Our MEC is saying YES to the very first offer before real section 6 negotiations even begins. How can you not see the problem there?

Do you not remember our MEC chairman begging us to give them a chance to show us all what a great job they can do with the first Section 6 negotiations that has occured on the property in over a decade? Is this it? Running from the table before Section 6 even begins and waving a victory flag?

Carl

05-24-2012, 08:57 PM

#101170

Boomer

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jan 2008

Position: blueJet

Posts: 4,515

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnso29

No it won't Carl. Do your math again.

The math largely depends on the timeframe.

Yes, the TA will reduce DCI seats for the short term (as 50s are parked early and 90s added). Looking long term, however, going from 255 to 325 large RJs will mean more DCI seats, since the 50s are being pulled down under either scenario.

The company is already thinking two moves ahead in this game, so perhaps you need to consider how many seats will be at DCI when you need to negotiate again?

You can call it the time value of seats.