Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
05-28-2012 | 02:46 PM
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
wrt the chart, ALL of 'em should pay the 737-800 rate. Then who cares what airplanes the company buys? They buy.. we fly.
05-28-2012 | 02:53 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
05-28-2012 | 02:56 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
One of the advantages of working for a large union is that your E&FA department gets to look at 37 different airlines and their internal numbers. While they are bound by confidentiality agreements they can quickly tell which carriers are out of the norm. ALPA also has copies of all the DCI (and many other regionals)ASA agreements and can match the numbers from the agreements with data provided by management. Lastly, most of the regionals are publicly traded companies (Trans States excepted) and have SEC reporting requirements. Those are yet another crosscheck.
In all honesty ALPA doesn't rely just on management's numbers.
In all honesty ALPA doesn't rely just on management's numbers.
I am surprised that United/Continental looked at those same numbers and decided to pursue 100% scope though. I know you will say look how well they are doing but they are not very happy with us right now because we are cutting the legs out from under them. Perhaps we are using USAPA's numbers in our computations
.The numbers being quoted by FTB are from the Form 41 data which you say you use as a crosscheck. I will grant that the numbers presented are not correct due to the fact that many of the cost are hidden by reimbursement cost as well as the fact that Delta directly covers the cost of most of the handling and servicing of the aircraft and passengers. Delta also pays a operating margin to the DCI carriers which is very hard to quantify into hourly cost of the outsourced aircraft.
The direct cost of the Pilot, FAs, and mechanics are the only true savings and there is money to be had in the scale of operation at Delta as well as the in operating margins paid to the DCI carriers. It will cost Delta more money but it's not an unthinkable or impossible amount.
05-28-2012 | 03:07 PM
Get's Every Day Off
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,864
Likes: 0
From: Retired
I would like to apologize to all active and former military servicemen. I was responding to Carl's post accusing the junior pilots as the one's that will vote yes to this. I took offense to that and responded in an inappropriate manner. I made this post sometime last week. It was a cheap shot at senior pilots. I threw the military comment in there because almost all of our senior pilots have some military affiliation. The airline used to hire almost all military while the pilots hired in the last few years are almost all civilian. My comment about not thinking for themselves came from the fact that a TA has never been voted down. I know this does not make my comment any better. I am sorry. I did not realize that one comment would offend so many people. Thank you guys and girls for defending our country.
05-28-2012 | 03:27 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
From: Nice while it lasted
I became intimately aware how a single word in a legal document can change everything during my divorce some years back.
This TA says the 76 seaters can come aboard when the company "...establishes a fleet..." What is the LEGAL definition of "establish"? I don't know (not a lawyer), but here' one I plucked from a regular dictionary: "set up (an organization, system, or set of rules) on a firm or permanent basis".
SET UP on a permanent basis. Not take delivery, not have on property, not operating. Setting up. So here's what I think this TA allows the company to do: announce the leasing of all 88 717s, thus "setting up" a new mainline fleet size. Then announce a buy order for every one of those 76 seaters, now allowed by the newly "established" mainline fleet size. All this to be followed by the parking plan for the -9s and (my guess) additional older aircraft the company doesn't want to keep but haven't told us yet. Does anyone really think the company wants to expand its narrowbody fleet some 70 airframes?
Once those 76ers are on order, they're here to stay. Rationalizing the RJ fleet size under the ratios won't come until sometime in 2014; our orders start trickling in in 2013. I personally don't believe this TA will trigger the left seat opportunities that some have touted. In fact, in terms of upgrade, I don't think it is a nail in the coffin - I think it is 70 nails in the coffin.
I don't trust the company to do right by us. This TA shows how little they value our contributions, and ALPA certainly seems OK with that notion. I have no idea if my scenario will come to fruition, but I hope no one is surprised if it does. One word - establish - appears to throw that door wide open.
05-28-2012 | 03:55 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Offer to pay the DCI carriers more for the aircraft remaining or basically renegotiate the ASA contract so that the the DCI carriers can increase their operating margins. This makes their shareholders happy.
Last edited by vprMatrix; 05-28-2012 at 04:08 PM.
05-28-2012 | 04:01 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
It was pretty ugly in the crew lounge today in atlanta. One of the guys was on the phone calling for backup.
05-28-2012 | 04:21 PM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
Ok, lets see:
The first date that the company needs to be in compliance with these ratios is Jan 15, 2015, a little over three years from now.
Unlike what TO stated in his letter from the chairman on March 21, the ratios don't come into play unless 76-seat jets are added. 1.D.9.b cell 9.
And as you correctly point out unlike anything we have had in our PWA before there is the "in the event a circumstance over which the Company does not have control" language tha is so vague it covers just about anything.
Let's do some Block-hour math.
We'll use Alfa's numbers and real figures:
3.6M block-hours annually
53.9% mainline share of block hours
1.94M mainline block hours or MBH
1.66M DCI block hours or DBH
Ratio 1.17 MBH to 1 DBH
That makes the ratio 1.17:1 (close to the figure provided by slowplay)
Add 70 76-seat RJs to DCI, a commensurate amount of 717s to mainline and fast forward to Jan 1 2015, the first time Delta needs to be in compliance.
First Example: DCI block hours reduced by 25%
(a 25% reduction in block hours would be proportional to reducing DCI from 600 aircraft to 450)
1.66M DCI block hours minus 25% (0.415M) equals 1.245M block hours
The final ratio is 1.56
1.245M x 1.56 = 1.94M mainline block hours required on Jan 1, 2015
Lets tally it up:
So how many more pilots required to fly 1.94M block hours in 2015 vs 1.94M block hours now? Zero (0)
There is no requirement for any additional Delta pilots if DCI is cut by 25% and we apply the minimum block-hour ratios in Section 1.D.9. from the TA.
Second Example: DCI block hours reduced by 13%
1.66M DCI block hours minus 15% (0.25M) equals 1.41M block hours
The final ratio is 1.56
1.44M x 1.56 = 2.20M mainline block hours required on Jan 1, 2015
That's an additional 0.26M block hours or a 13% gain.
Lets plug that into Alfas formula:
The block hour increase is 0.26M or 260K annually.
Divide by 12 to get per month: 260K /12 = 21.667 hours/month
Divide 21.667/2 for each seat, A and B = 10,833
Divide 10,833 by 60 = 181 pilots (60 hrs/month is the staffing formula)
Lets tally it up:
And we get a block hour formula that will lock in 181 new pilot positions or just over two pilots per 717...
Final Example: DCI block hours not reduced (same DCI block hours in 2015 as now)
1.66M DCI block hours
The final ratio is 1.56
1.66 x 1.56 = 2.59 mainline block hours required on Jan 1, 2015
That's an additional 0.65M block hours or a 33% gain.
Lets plug that into Alfas formula:
The block hour increase is 0.65M or 650K annually.
Divide by 12 to get per month: 650K /12 = 54,167 hours/month
Divide 54,167/2 for each seat, A and B = 27,083
Divide 27,083 by 60 = 451 pilots (60 hrs/month is the staffing formula)
Lets tally it up:
If we don't cut DCI block hours at all but give them more 76-seat jets, the formula in Section 1.D.9 will require 451 additional mainline pilots, or five pilots per 717.
Not reducing block hours at DCI means same number of DCI pilots flying new 76-seat jets. They will be producing more ASMs for every block hour and at a lower cost.
Capacity would have been gained at DCI if the block hours stay the same as now because there would be more large 76-seat jet flying the hours compared to now.
Final Verdict:
Based on the proposed ratios for aircraft and the block-hour limits proposed in Section 1.D.9 the Delta pilots stand most to gain from the TA if we give more 76-seat jets to DCI and don't reduce the DCI block hours.
Unfortunately because the relationship is expressed as a ratio, cutting DCI hurts growth at mainline.
Finally while the new block-hour ratios are a welcome addition to the PWA, their protection is highly overstated and with just five pilots per new 717 doesn't even come close to actual staffing needs. If Delta staffed the 717 with five crews per aircraft, the block-hour protection wouldn't cover the first officer positions before requiring a reduction in DCI flying.
Cheers
George
The first date that the company needs to be in compliance with these ratios is Jan 15, 2015, a little over three years from now.
Unlike what TO stated in his letter from the chairman on March 21, the ratios don't come into play unless 76-seat jets are added. 1.D.9.b cell 9.
And as you correctly point out unlike anything we have had in our PWA before there is the "in the event a circumstance over which the Company does not have control" language tha is so vague it covers just about anything.
Let's do some Block-hour math.
We'll use Alfa's numbers and real figures:
3.6M block-hours annually
53.9% mainline share of block hours
1.94M mainline block hours or MBH
1.66M DCI block hours or DBH
Ratio 1.17 MBH to 1 DBH
That makes the ratio 1.17:1 (close to the figure provided by slowplay)
Add 70 76-seat RJs to DCI, a commensurate amount of 717s to mainline and fast forward to Jan 1 2015, the first time Delta needs to be in compliance.
First Example: DCI block hours reduced by 25%
(a 25% reduction in block hours would be proportional to reducing DCI from 600 aircraft to 450)
1.66M DCI block hours minus 25% (0.415M) equals 1.245M block hours
The final ratio is 1.56
1.245M x 1.56 = 1.94M mainline block hours required on Jan 1, 2015
Lets tally it up:
- Add 88 717 jets at mainline
- Add 70 76-seat jets at DCI
- Cut the DCI fleet to 450 jets
- Cut DCI block hours by 25%
So how many more pilots required to fly 1.94M block hours in 2015 vs 1.94M block hours now? Zero (0)
There is no requirement for any additional Delta pilots if DCI is cut by 25% and we apply the minimum block-hour ratios in Section 1.D.9. from the TA.
Second Example: DCI block hours reduced by 13%
1.66M DCI block hours minus 15% (0.25M) equals 1.41M block hours
The final ratio is 1.56
1.44M x 1.56 = 2.20M mainline block hours required on Jan 1, 2015
That's an additional 0.26M block hours or a 13% gain.
Lets plug that into Alfas formula:
The block hour increase is 0.26M or 260K annually.
Divide by 12 to get per month: 260K /12 = 21.667 hours/month
Divide 21.667/2 for each seat, A and B = 10,833
Divide 10,833 by 60 = 181 pilots (60 hrs/month is the staffing formula)
Lets tally it up:
- Add 88 717 jets at mainline
- Add 70 76-seat jets at DCI
- Cut the DCI fleet to 450 jets
- Cut DCI block hours by 15%
And we get a block hour formula that will lock in 181 new pilot positions or just over two pilots per 717...
Final Example: DCI block hours not reduced (same DCI block hours in 2015 as now)
1.66M DCI block hours
The final ratio is 1.56
1.66 x 1.56 = 2.59 mainline block hours required on Jan 1, 2015
That's an additional 0.65M block hours or a 33% gain.
Lets plug that into Alfas formula:
The block hour increase is 0.65M or 650K annually.
Divide by 12 to get per month: 650K /12 = 54,167 hours/month
Divide 54,167/2 for each seat, A and B = 27,083
Divide 27,083 by 60 = 451 pilots (60 hrs/month is the staffing formula)
Lets tally it up:
- Add 88 717 jets at mainline
- Add 70 76-seat jets at DCI
- Cut the DCI fleet to 450 jets
- Maintain current DCI block hours
If we don't cut DCI block hours at all but give them more 76-seat jets, the formula in Section 1.D.9 will require 451 additional mainline pilots, or five pilots per 717.
Not reducing block hours at DCI means same number of DCI pilots flying new 76-seat jets. They will be producing more ASMs for every block hour and at a lower cost.
Capacity would have been gained at DCI if the block hours stay the same as now because there would be more large 76-seat jet flying the hours compared to now.
Final Verdict:
Based on the proposed ratios for aircraft and the block-hour limits proposed in Section 1.D.9 the Delta pilots stand most to gain from the TA if we give more 76-seat jets to DCI and don't reduce the DCI block hours.
Unfortunately because the relationship is expressed as a ratio, cutting DCI hurts growth at mainline.
Finally while the new block-hour ratios are a welcome addition to the PWA, their protection is highly overstated and with just five pilots per new 717 doesn't even come close to actual staffing needs. If Delta staffed the 717 with five crews per aircraft, the block-hour protection wouldn't cover the first officer positions before requiring a reduction in DCI flying.
Cheers
George
The work rules that are part of this deal will allow us to do it with about 3-4 less pilots in each seat in each jet in each base.
05-28-2012 | 04:22 PM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
05-28-2012 | 04:24 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
This is yet another of my year 2000 forecasts that has come to pass. If the bar is lowered at one part of the Company, expect management to learn that regional scheduling is "safe enough" and eventually mainline will operate a lot like the regionals.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
