Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-24-2012 | 11:26 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
Last parting shot, cannot resist. 
Taking 600 RJs down to 450 but with the seat miles of 550, is not a win. Its a slight of hand.
Especially if the network plan going forward only requires 125 50-seaters but demands many more 76-seaters, like say 70 now and maybe more in 2016? All we're doing is facilitating the plan at our expense.
And this is especially not a win if by the time the shinny newish 717 carrots and the really new 739s get here they've been slated to be pure replacement jets.
But do not get me wrong, if network needs or wants large regional jets, by all means have as many as you want and order them as fast as they can be delivered. I just won't vote for a contract that gives up scope to do that.
Taking 600 RJs down to 450 but with the seat miles of 550, is not a win. Its a slight of hand.
Especially if the network plan going forward only requires 125 50-seaters but demands many more 76-seaters, like say 70 now and maybe more in 2016? All we're doing is facilitating the plan at our expense.
And this is especially not a win if by the time the shinny newish 717 carrots and the really new 739s get here they've been slated to be pure replacement jets.
But do not get me wrong, if network needs or wants large regional jets, by all means have as many as you want and order them as fast as they can be delivered. I just won't vote for a contract that gives up scope to do that.
Last edited by forgot to bid; 05-25-2012 at 12:00 AM.
05-24-2012 | 11:57 PM
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
05-24-2012 | 11:59 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 667
Likes: 0
From: 737n/FO
I see what you're getting at. Section 1.D.9.b covers the ratio of MBH to DBH. The ratio begins when the first 76-Seat Aircraft is "Engaged" in Delta flying.
I guess I wasn't clear, but the ratio is re-figured every 10 deliveries, with the ratio favoring mainline higher and higher as the 76 seaters and 717's come on, and the 50 seaters are parked. The ratio calculation is different than compliance monitoring which is covered in this section:
1.D.9.c says that compliance will "be measured for the first time on July 1, 2014 and then measured again each succeeding July 1 thereafter, in each instance for the preceeding 12 months on a weighted basis [emphasis mine.]"
The way I read it, and that it was explained in the lounge the other day, is that the bolded part above prevents the loophole that you were suggesting. Thanks for engaging in the conversation though. You made me go re-read that section, which is a good thing!
I guess I wasn't clear, but the ratio is re-figured every 10 deliveries, with the ratio favoring mainline higher and higher as the 76 seaters and 717's come on, and the 50 seaters are parked. The ratio calculation is different than compliance monitoring which is covered in this section:
1.D.9.c says that compliance will "be measured for the first time on July 1, 2014 and then measured again each succeeding July 1 thereafter, in each instance for the preceeding 12 months on a weighted basis [emphasis mine.]"
The way I read it, and that it was explained in the lounge the other day, is that the bolded part above prevents the loophole that you were suggesting. Thanks for engaging in the conversation though. You made me go re-read that section, which is a good thing!
05-25-2012 | 12:01 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
And having a hard ratio to protect us is about as valuable as having a hard cap of 255 large regional jets.
05-25-2012 | 12:01 AM
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
FTB,
You just hit the nail, once these aircraft are here, they are here to stay, remember that their number will NOT be reduced. That one sentence led me to vote NO on our previous agreements, and I think that statement will come back to haunt us with this agreement. I do think once they are here MGT will be back for block hour restriction relief after just a short time.
Keep these jets off property unless WE are at the controls!
Maybe we could get our point across if all the NO voters put their ballots in on the first day the polls open. I have read the agreement and in no way can I vote for this, as DAL has become my hobby job, it quit being a career long ago.
You just hit the nail, once these aircraft are here, they are here to stay, remember that their number will NOT be reduced. That one sentence led me to vote NO on our previous agreements, and I think that statement will come back to haunt us with this agreement. I do think once they are here MGT will be back for block hour restriction relief after just a short time.
Keep these jets off property unless WE are at the controls!
Maybe we could get our point across if all the NO voters put their ballots in on the first day the polls open. I have read the agreement and in no way can I vote for this, as DAL has become my hobby job, it quit being a career long ago.
If you are junior, you are saying no to your captain's seat for a while longer. I don't care how you vote, I already have mine. It's up to you.
No scare tactics... no spin. I read the agreement. It is a home run. I see a lot of target fixation on this board, and it is causing a LOT of myopia that leads to glaucoma which leads to blindness. The really sad thing is, it is preventable... Educate yourselves rather than firing before you aim.
05-25-2012 | 12:08 AM
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
05-25-2012 | 12:08 AM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
Just to be a devils advocate for a second; those jets fly large Dal corporate contacts which bring a lots of revenue. We did just allow something we filed a grievance over though.
05-25-2012 | 12:10 AM
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
Maybe a charter, but they are planning a full on assault on DL over the next year or two. At least 3 of our hubs. Based on rolling over and giving up BOS without a whimper, they are probably feeling saucy that we'll let them have their way in ATL, DTW and MSP while letting them set the fare buckets.
05-25-2012 | 12:16 AM
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
I don't think anyone here disagrees with your math here tsquare. I just have a few questions:
1. Where in the survey did it ask how much we wanted to paid above UsAir?
2. When did our MEC state that we'll be happy and not go forward with a traditional Section 6 as long as we can agree in an expedited manner to be paid above UsAir wages?
Because I missed that. I only remember an MEC Chairman that stated this expedited negotiations must produce a contract that satisfies our pilots based on their survey results. If those don't happen, we begin a traditional Section 6 process. The MEC reneged on that PROMISE.
Carl
1. Where in the survey did it ask how much we wanted to paid above UsAir?
2. When did our MEC state that we'll be happy and not go forward with a traditional Section 6 as long as we can agree in an expedited manner to be paid above UsAir wages?
Because I missed that. I only remember an MEC Chairman that stated this expedited negotiations must produce a contract that satisfies our pilots based on their survey results. If those don't happen, we begin a traditional Section 6 process. The MEC reneged on that PROMISE.
Carl
YOUR pay metric won't necessarily be the same, and there ARE differences because of the DC contribution rates. But you have a full defined benefit plan... (probably not at 747 rates, and I guess it really must suck to have 330 rate to calculate it with...) There are many DAL pilots that will have more money in their pockets at the end of this agreement than will SWA pilots. It is a significant bite of the apple. The next dot on the scale.. which we will be able to start working toward as soon as the ink is dry on this one, will be the UPS 767 rates. And that will happen in less than 3 years. That is the dot that will keep you from leaving when you should.
So keep encouraging all the junior guys to vote this down Carl. YOU have nothing to lose..... You have yours.
05-25-2012 | 12:23 AM
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
That's not at all certain because:
1. This TA keeps the same loophole language available to the company that allows them to claim "events beyond their control" for damn near anything except a very narrow list of items.
2. Our very union has a history of modifying these items that appear to constrain management depending upon the needs of management. Sometimes these modifications are done by a single MEC bureaucrat via an MOU as opposed to MEMRAT.
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.
This is incredibly dangerous legal ground.
Carl
1. This TA keeps the same loophole language available to the company that allows them to claim "events beyond their control" for damn near anything except a very narrow list of items.
2. Our very union has a history of modifying these items that appear to constrain management depending upon the needs of management. Sometimes these modifications are done by a single MEC bureaucrat via an MOU as opposed to MEMRAT.
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.
This is incredibly dangerous legal ground.
Carl
Item 2 above is nothing more than you pressing your donut agenda. yawn.
Item 3 is so out to lunch I have no idea where to begin.
Your ground is nothing but fearmongering.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
