Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
well, I'm not former NWA so I don't know about that, nor should it even matter.
Alfa and Slow:
Wrt to the ratios in DCI and the 717:
Are the ratios based upon known retirements and deliveries?
Do the ratios include adding the 717?
Do the ratios guarantee growth or just no more stagnation?
If the company gets all 88 717's and exercises all options for the 76 seat platform, what will mainlines fleet count be? DCI?
If you are unwilling or unable to answer the above question; given the ratios and known fleet plan at mainline, how many growth 717's would we be getting over current mainline jet count?
A follow on:
What is the expected ratio of mainline growth to newly allowed 76 seat jets. Less than 1:1 in favor of DCI? Better than 1:1? If so by how much?
What these ratios seems to imply is one "growth" snb to every newly allowed large 76 seat jet. The numbers guys are saying best case we see a fleet of about 770 or about where we were at SOC.
Please show your work. I am curious about this and what real growth if any this will result in with the work rule changes.
Thanks,
Want to make an informed vote.
Wrt to the ratios in DCI and the 717:
Are the ratios based upon known retirements and deliveries?
Do the ratios include adding the 717?
Do the ratios guarantee growth or just no more stagnation?
If the company gets all 88 717's and exercises all options for the 76 seat platform, what will mainlines fleet count be? DCI?
If you are unwilling or unable to answer the above question; given the ratios and known fleet plan at mainline, how many growth 717's would we be getting over current mainline jet count?
A follow on:
What is the expected ratio of mainline growth to newly allowed 76 seat jets. Less than 1:1 in favor of DCI? Better than 1:1? If so by how much?
What these ratios seems to imply is one "growth" snb to every newly allowed large 76 seat jet. The numbers guys are saying best case we see a fleet of about 770 or about where we were at SOC.
Please show your work. I am curious about this and what real growth if any this will result in with the work rule changes.
Thanks,
Want to make an informed vote.
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: 320B
Posts: 781
I am trying to figure something out here (sorry if this has been discussed previously, but it is hard to keep up here). We want to get paid as much as the SWA pilots get on their W2's. This TA puts us at their pay rates, however it will give us less W2's. Doesn't that mean that the SWA pilots actually work more that we do. Also, I did the calculations regarding number of pilots per aircraft (using data from airlinepilotcentral.com) and it looks like SWA staff's their a/c at a little less than 11 pilots per a/c while we are at a little more than 16 per a/c. If we had SWA work rules, wouldn't that be a loss of a few thousand pilot positions for us?
I am trying to figure something out here (sorry if this has been discussed previously, but it is hard to keep up here). We want to get paid as much as the SWA pilots get on their W2's. This TA puts us at their pay rates, however it will give us less W2's. Doesn't that mean that the SWA pilots actually work more that we do. Also, I did the calculations regarding number of pilots per aircraft (using data from airlinepilotcentral.com) and it looks like SWA staff's their a/c at a little less than 11 pilots per a/c while we are at a little more than 16 per a/c. If we had SWA work rules, wouldn't that be a loss of a few thousand pilot positions for us?
different aircraft types require more crews per plane. maybe if 737's was all we flew it would be a level playing field.
I am trying to figure something out here (sorry if this has been discussed previously, but it is hard to keep up here). We want to get paid as much as the SWA pilots get on their W2's. This TA puts us at their pay rates, however it will give us less W2's. Doesn't that mean that the SWA pilots actually work more that we do. Also, I did the calculations regarding number of pilots per aircraft (using data from airlinepilotcentral.com) and it looks like SWA staff's their a/c at a little less than 11 pilots per a/c while we are at a little more than 16 per a/c. If we had SWA work rules, wouldn't that be a loss of a few thousand pilot positions for us?
They have premium open time - many pilots drop their whole schedule and just fly the premium open time.
There are some who work more than us, but depending upon how you define work more (more days per month or more hours per month), they work close to the same hours and fewer days than us. Their average work day is 9 hours between hotels.
They are still limited to 1000 hours per year. That equates to 82 hours per month.
There is always risk in voting either way for a TA. If you vote yes and then UCAL comes in and blows our TA out of the water then we are stuck for 3 years or you pore over the 10k data from this year and next and realize we left $ on the table. There is also a real risk in voting no and fear has nothing to do with it. Every decision we make has a risk reward factor. This company has a direction they want to go at a certain cost level. This TA gives them the cost structure they need to execute their plan. A real possibility if we reject this TA is DL will opt to go a different route. DL is projected to make record profits with the current contract in place for the next 2 years so obviously the status qou is not hurting them 50 seaters and all.
The majority rules and right now I think it will be a no vote. I have no problem with that but I do have a problem with people that say there is no risk in a no vote or equate risk with fear.
The majority rules and right now I think it will be a no vote. I have no problem with that but I do have a problem with people that say there is no risk in a no vote or equate risk with fear.
This place is depressing beyond words.
I disagree:
My trips are almost all hard time. Other categories have credit time.
We have large enough fleets to get economies of scale, but Due to several factors, DAL chooses not to schedule us efficiently because it costs them nothing to use us inefficiently. If we had a 6 hour daily guarantee, that would be us forcing the company to schedule efficiently. As it is today, they only schedule us efficiently if it works for them.
Can you imagine keeping the same plane all day, same flt attendants all day, no airport sitarounds, and getting 6 plus hours every day of a trip minimum? DAL can do that today, they simply choose not to.
I disagree:
My trips are almost all hard time. Other categories have credit time.
We have large enough fleets to get economies of scale, but Due to several factors, DAL chooses not to schedule us efficiently because it costs them nothing to use us inefficiently. If we had a 6 hour daily guarantee, that would be us forcing the company to schedule efficiently. As it is today, they only schedule us efficiently if it works for them.
Can you imagine keeping the same plane all day, same flt attendants all day, no airport sitarounds, and getting 6 plus hours every day of a trip minimum? DAL can do that today, they simply choose not to.
My trips are almost all hard time. Other categories have credit time.
We have large enough fleets to get economies of scale, but Due to several factors, DAL chooses not to schedule us efficiently because it costs them nothing to use us inefficiently. If we had a 6 hour daily guarantee, that would be us forcing the company to schedule efficiently. As it is today, they only schedule us efficiently if it works for them.
Can you imagine keeping the same plane all day, same flt attendants all day, no airport sitarounds, and getting 6 plus hours every day of a trip minimum? DAL can do that today, they simply choose not to.
I really don't understand the debate on this TA. In 2015, the 7er will pay $216. In 2004, the 7er paid 267. So 11 years later, it will pay $51 less (or 19% less). 11 years later!
Did anyone think we would have any chance of meaningful restoration without a fight?
If we have any hope of truly restoring this profession, we will have to go to the mattresses. Period. (It definitely won't come from a 2 month, Neville Chamberlin, peace in our time, TA.
This not an LOA/MOU. This is our 1st section 6 since BK. I would hope our goal would be significant (i.e., large) gains in all areas of the contract.
I for one, am not ready to throw the towel in on this profession. I hope that the majority agrees.
Did anyone think we would have any chance of meaningful restoration without a fight?
If we have any hope of truly restoring this profession, we will have to go to the mattresses. Period. (It definitely won't come from a 2 month, Neville Chamberlin, peace in our time, TA.
This not an LOA/MOU. This is our 1st section 6 since BK. I would hope our goal would be significant (i.e., large) gains in all areas of the contract.
I for one, am not ready to throw the towel in on this profession. I hope that the majority agrees.
So do you think that management or the NMB (when and if the time comes) will look at out case for C2K + and say... well... yeah.. even though they turned down rates that were higher than the rest of the ENTIRE INDUSTRY.. we see their plight, and will give them what they asked for... really?
Or... do you think that we can use the same play book that the oh so great SWAPA ( you know.. the one that ya'll seem to think hung the moon?) has used for years and years and get a little bit at a time? No.. I see us voting this down, and doing the same old thing, the same old way... and it will take a few years to get back to where we are right now. Cure the "fear tactics" guys in 3...2...1........
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post