gloopy

They don't have to be "competitive" with the cut throat DCI outsourcing machine. That is a management fantasy. Our 320's don't have to "be competitive" with VX's pay and benefits. They only have to be competitive in that they can be flown with a cost structure that fits others in the mainline fleet WRT CASM. Same for the 90 seat "RJ's". There is always someone willing to fly a plane cheaper than someone else. Unlike the DCI RFP's you don't have to be the lowest bidder when you own the scope.

Even a substantial dollar/hr increase vs the highest cost DCI carrier is to the right of the decimal on the CASM number. The 90 seaters absolutely can be flown at mainline well within reason of any other mainline AC CASM. Even if its a little bit higher, that cost can easily be amortized over the size of the (second) largest (and continually shrinking to profitability) airline in the world.

Carl Spackler

First of all, there is no requirement for Delta management to even measure the ratio until mid 2014. Then if it turns out Delta has exceeded the RJ ratio, they have until January 2015 to "execute their plan" to bring the RJ block hour ratio back into compliance.

I know that wasn't your question, but the measuring metric and timeline is important. Your question was one of penalty. There is NONE. There is only a requirement to...and I quote: "...execute their plan" to bring the RJ block hour ratio back into complicance. Our only option at that point would be to file a grievance. Then the grievance will be scheduled and eventually heard by an arbitrator. Then the arbitrator will park us for 15 to 20 years simply because somebody said they can. Then there's a possibility that the arbitrator will rule that Delta must put the RJ block hour ratio back into complicance...or he could decide that "ratio" didn't mean what DALPA thought it meant and find for the company.

Carl

gloopy

It is no tin foil hat crackpot theory that we are more likely to see another transactional event than not. In fact its pretty obvious we are and everyone in the industry knows it. Its established canon in this era of aviation we're in that further consolidation is a certainty and its very likely DL will participate.

I'm not basing my vote on that possibility, as my vote on the TA more than stands on its own regardless of that issue. But we do need to be weighing the realistic possibilities of DL being involved in another transactional event and the AS example I used is at least on the short list of the more likely possibilities.

Carl Spackler

Delta has those options because they don't even consider the possibility that their friends in DALPA will let them down and oppose them on anything. Negotiations occur with everyone on the same side of the table.

In a real union/management relationship, one of the options Delta would have to factor in is a really bad reaction by the union leadership, and the pilot membership. Thus putting their plan of labor peace into question when they go looking for asset financing.

So to answer your question, given the fact that we are represented by DALPA, there's no reason for them to spend more money because they're convinced they know what all their options are.

Carl

slowplay

I love academic exercises...let's take the second line of quesitoning first and talk about is, not what might be.

When does the company have to park 76 seaters under our current PWA? How many block hours can DCI fly under our current PWA? How much does DCI have to cut back if mainline shrinks under our current PWA? How's that different under our new TA?

As to your first question, I thought you were the spreadsheet guy. How has Delta's active fleet bounced around so much with few deliveries? Any fully depreciated airplanes moving from desert storage to active and back again?

Next data point...how many 737-900 and MD-90 deliveries are coming in the next 3 years? (hint...there's 60/25 for a total of 85). How take out 17 DC-9 aircraft and what is our fleet count? How many a/c do we have to have on board to convert all 255 to 76 seat jets? You like mathmatical possiblilites (not probablilities) so how does that model work out?

So I'm calling you on trying to take both sides of this argument. You try to develop a spreadsheet with 300 180 seat jets to show what management could do under a new contract, then try to deny what management could do with actual aircraft on order under our current contract. I thought preacher's kids were taught better than that!

Oh, I'm developing a spreadsheet that will show 30 A380's taking out the whole MD-88 fleet..same number of seats and all. NewK will look cool in one of those.

newKnow

If anyone is looking for some real fighting, The Hatfields and McCoys is on the History Channel. They make Carl and Slowplay look like best friends.

DogWhisperer

Why does the "parrot" scene from Monty Python pop into my head when I see the T/A?

Carl Spackler

Again, and I'll type slowly: I'm not talking about believing the company or Wall Street...our REPS are calling this a cost neutral TA. Our REPS.

Carl

scambo1

You haven't done the "ratio" math. So, you are just parrotting the party line.

slowplay

Boomer, when can management get the new 76 seaters you're so worried about?

Hint..it's after they deliver planes to mainline. SWA has already published the delivery schedule. With that schedule they can't access the last of the 76 seaters until the end of 2015....