If you don't like the numbers, please provide us with Delta's actual MD88, MD90, 738, 737, 320, 319, DC9, estimated 717 and all of the RJ CASMs. You can group the RJ CASMs together by seat size if it helps.

And forgive us if we don't just take your word for it, afterall, you committee guys are trying to get us to buy off on this thing like a frantic used car dealer. We'd like hard numbers.

Thanks.
FTB

A few folks are saying "oh crap" right now.......

LOA #11 page 422

Thanks fly! ;)

is she a military pilot ?

Here I put the link of the source data at the bottom...

http://i938.photobucket.com/albums/a...eWinning-2.png

But I kept the dudes in the background.

I think my issue with this, imho scope concession, is we're expanding the threat to our jobs in exchange for diminishing the non-threat aircraft. I think if I could pull a trick, like this scope concession, on someone I'd be biting my tongue the entire time trying not to laugh and scream SUCKER!

Also, the press release in August for the 739 order specifically said there were being ordered to replace the 763s, 757s and A320s. Note what's missing? The MD-88. http://multivu.prnewswire.com/mnr/delta/47827/

I think that 88 B717s is about 75% of the current 88 fleet. Add in 90s and CRJ900s and you've pretty much replaced that fleet. So I just don't see much hiring with the 717... especially if they come with pilots... so I just don't see that as a good carrot. I am afraid come DOS we're just going to get beat over the head by the stick that was holding that carrot. I always envisioned 717s as growth aircraft, till they got tied IN THE TA to CRJ-900s. source: TA :rolleyes:

Then it became clear they 717s are not growth aircraft.

Touche. Although I agree with Hockeypilot on most issues, he sh!t the bed with that "military pilots" comment.

Hockey, my man, I'm a mil guy/reservist and I'm campaigning like hell to shoot this thing down.

Let's focus on defeating this abominable TA.

She must be ex military. :p

No problemo. I should mention that I don't think there is anything wrong with the program per se. It's great to be able to offer that to anybody. I just don't buy that it's implementation is going to result in one single AE over the next year.

A major issue for me is that if we sign off on this thing, it becomes the new baseline.

We can't gripe about our crap rates "due to bankruptcy" if we allow this TA to pass--we would have endorsed a cost-neutral contract when the company is poised to make $2 billion!

To the guys who (once again) say "this sets us up nicely for the next contract", well, if we can't do it when the company's about to make billions, we won't do it next time, either.

We are throwing away our last chance to set ourselves up to reclaim our pre-BK QOL.