|
|
Originally Posted by gloopy
Maybe, but at what point do we start losing hard to the non hedged airlines? More importantly, with us continuing to monetize our market share in exchange for short term numbers, in essence funding the ULCC's and fantasy foreign airlines' order books, at some point cheap oil will really start to hurt us. Remember it was merciless oil that helped euthanize the cancer that could have been SkyBus (and IndyAir earlier on too). Cheap oil may help us now, hedges notwithstanding, but unless we're willing to take it to the ULCC's (and we're not) cheap oil only further insures they survive and thrive and continue to live in endless growth mode, unchallenged by us, which will require more "capacity dicipline" to keep our numbers up... At least if we Fmessed up and the TA passes none of us will get furloughed. |
Besides, we get a great deal on MS Office and Windows makes more sense to me then whatever the heck is going on with my wife's Mac. "Where did that window go?"[/QUOTE]
I think Microsoft has that deal with every employer in America. My wife's old employer had it, along with her new one. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
Only fools fear smart people (for no reason other than their intelligence).
Throughout history, those who have seen the World as something other than zero-sum (you win/I lose) have been time again the consistent winners (you win & I win). There is typically more to be gained through cooperation than conflict. It is certainly more difficult for ALPA's experts to explain cooperative negotiations to a group that expects proclamations of "Veni, vidi, vici" (we came, we saw, we conquered). Examples abound. In global trade we have the choice of trading nuclear strikes with China, or trading cash and shiny plastic crap. The shiny plastic crap approach may be less glorious than war, but our kids prefer the more cooperative choice. Religiously, the "god" of Deuteronomy managed to get Israel conquered by the Babylonians. A much more tolerant and cooperative "god" started Christianity and arguably the other two main religions on the planet. In historical perspective the difference between intolerance and tolerance (while standing firmly in one's beliefs) is stark. Further, ALPA's experts are better than those straight out of B school for the following reasons: [*]Experience[*]They have the nearly instant data and know how to apply it[*]Schools teach history. By the time information is discovered, thoughtfully considered, debated, consensus reached and published that information is no longer current and perhaps not even relevant[*]Experience (worth saying twice) I've also found a huge number of guys I fly with have advanced degrees. The Delta gene pool is deep. There has been a lot of transfer between Delta's pilots and management. Based on results (compared to our peers) the evidence is that this has worked. ALPA draws from that same pool, with the additional factor that we have pilots representing us who share our career aspirations and desires. They have skin in our game. The same skill set to obtain a ATP Certificate is useful in gaining an MBA. I'd put our experts against their experts any day. While I agree with you that ours vs theirs stand nearly toe to toe (and experience counts triple if you ask me), while the NDAs may land a lot of data in our analysts hands, it is the company financial experts that craft the revenue vs. expense into the quarterly filings. That's worth more than the ALPA analysts can give because they're running the airline. Not the ALPA guys. With all that being said, constructive engagement between two parties not heck bent on MAD is clearly the way to go. The Delta track record over the last two years speaks volumes to that and has been converted into a positive net gain for the pilots. With or without he next 10 days, life is pretty good. Far better than a majority of our ALPA peers. Just don't forget that the company has a wide gene pool to draw from, but they may sacrifice the creamiest of the intellectual crop for someone that sees things a bit more clearly their way. It's these people that were opposite the table from our negotiators. Hence my belief that no matter the supply of bean counters, he who counts the beans knows them best. And I believe firmly that their skin is just as empowering as ours when it comes to this game. |
Originally Posted by Waves
(Post 1216126)
Have any of you staunch “NO” voters taken inventory of world events? Greece, Spain, Italy, Iran, Syria, Euro Crisis, 911 type repeat attempts, no new drilling, horrible world and domestic economy, etc. It could get much worse overnight. All it would take would be another undesirable major event to occur and we may be wishing we could turn back the clock for a re-do. Remember when fuel went to $148 per barrel?
Originally Posted by Waves
(Post 1216126)
Do we really want to go back to the table for an extra percent or two? SWA pilots (and UAL) have been heard thanking us for this TA because they weren’t sure they could even hang on to their own pay rates. Additionally, do we really want to hurt the golden goose by penalizing a former management team for over buying 50 seater’s?
Originally Posted by Waves
(Post 1216126)
I’m getting ready to pull the voting handle. I used to joke about my “NO” voting record and wondered if I could just place a default bid for all ALPA’s first offers, but I’m not seeing anything in this TA that would make me vote no. Yes it could be better, but how much better.
|
Originally Posted by Elvis90
(Post 1216140)
Oil at $79/barrel & dropping. It's been a long time since we've seen that price. I see a windfall coming.
The answer appears to be declining demand, particularly in Europe and if you monitor auto sales as a determinant of oil demand, China's rate of growth is decreasing too. US oil consumption peaked some years ago and has been coming down. While some of this is good, the "less demand" aspect is troubling for airlines in as much as decreasing energy consumption has a lot to do with people deciding not to travel as much. Delta keeps announcing capacity reductions, which reduces our demand, both for fuel and pilots. I'm not sure if we are better off with this TA in a continued capacity reduction. Clearly the CRJ900 is the desired airplane for the reduced capacity mainline mission. As others have stated, the B717 makes a good MD88 / A320 replacement, which does nothing to help those pilots who are getting displaced. IMHO the TA works better if Delta has capacity growth. In a continued period of capacity reduction (which it looks like we are entering, again) we may be better off with current DCI limitations. The decision on how to vote will come down to the wire for me. I'll be very interested to see what the Judge does with American tomorrow. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1216186)
The more important question is "why is oil dropping"?
The answer appears to be declining demand, particularly in Europe and if you monitor auto sales as a determinant of oil demand, China's rate of growth is decreasing too. US oil consumption peaked some years ago and has been coming down. While some of this is good, the "less demand" aspect is troubling for airlines in as much as decreasing energy consumption has a lot to do with people deciding not to travel as much. Delta keeps announcing capacity reductions, which reduces our demand, both for fuel and pilots. I'm not sure if we are better off with this TA in a continued capacity reduction. Clearly the CRJ900 is the desired airplane for the reduced capacity mainline mission. As others have stated, the B717 makes a good MD88 / A320 replacement, which does nothing to help those pilots who are getting displaced. IMHO the TA works better if Delta has capacity growth. In a continued period of capacity reduction (which it looks like we are entering, again) we may be better off with current DCI limitations. The decision on how to vote will come down to the wire for me. I'll be very interested to see what the Judge does with American tomorrow. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1216186)
IMHO the TA works better if Delta has capacity growth. In a continued period of capacity reduction (which it looks like we are entering, again) we may be better off with current DCI limitations.
The decision on how to vote will come down to the wire for me. I'll be very interested to see what the Judge does with American tomorrow. As was pointed out above, mostly by the "yes" side of the house, the company has a WIDE pool of people who do this analysis for a living, and are very good at it. It could be that our side was just half a step behind the analysis curve, and were OK with the TA using the data they have...one that showed growth, high HVC and other good yielding loads, and high fuel prices...a set of circumstances that may provide a reasonable rational for the TA being acceptable. OTOH, if the economy turns as you describe, the current book may be preferable, at least from a work rule and scope aspect. If the company saw the trend of the economy favoriting the TA, in their perspective, that could be the reason while they were in such a rush to get it done...before the trends became apparent to someone who didn't have immediate or real time access to the trend information. The questions are: 1) Why wasn't a TA negotiated that had sufficient SHORT TERM BACKSTOPS? 2) If the economy is deflating, and the TA is a worse situation from staffing and scope, is it too late to hop off the train? Nu |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 1216200)
Well Bar that is it. This TA was for a growth business plan. One that would motor us all out of some less than desirable work rule changes. Anything short of that and it's ugly from section 1 on down.
|
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1216186)
The more important question is "why is oil dropping"?
The answer appears to be declining demand, particularly in Europe and if you monitor auto sales as a determinant of oil demand, China's rate of growth is decreasing too. US oil consumption peaked some years ago and has been coming down. While some of this is good, the "less demand" aspect is troubling for airlines in as much as decreasing energy consumption has a lot to do with people deciding not to travel as much. Delta keeps announcing capacity reductions, which reduces our demand, both for fuel and pilots. I'm not sure if we are better off with this TA in a continued capacity reduction. Clearly the CRJ900 is the desired airplane for the reduced capacity mainline mission. As others have stated, the B717 makes a good MD88 / A320 replacement, which does nothing to help those pilots who are getting displaced. IMHO the TA works better if Delta has capacity growth. In a continued period of capacity reduction (which it looks like we are entering, again) we may be better off with current DCI limitations. The decision on how to vote will come down to the wire for me. I'll be very interested to see what the Judge does with American tomorrow. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1216186)
The more important question is "why is oil dropping"?
The answer appears to be declining demand, particularly in Europe and if you monitor auto sales as a determinant of oil demand, China's rate of growth is decreasing too. US oil consumption peaked some years ago and has been coming down. While some of this is good, the "less demand" aspect is troubling for airlines in as much as decreasing energy consumption has a lot to do with people deciding not to travel as much. Delta keeps announcing capacity reductions, which reduces our demand, both for fuel and pilots. I'm not sure if we are better off with this TA in a continued capacity reduction. Clearly the CRJ900 is the desired airplane for the reduced capacity mainline mission. As others have stated, the B717 makes a good MD88 / A320 replacement, which does nothing to help those pilots who are getting displaced. IMHO the TA works better if Delta has capacity growth. In a continued period of capacity reduction (which it looks like we are entering, again) we may be better off with current DCI limitations. The decision on how to vote will come down to the wire for me. I'll be very interested to see what the Judge does with American tomorrow. Moving MD90 pilots to the 717 coupled with 767/757 pilots to the 739, that has to be some decent coinage savings. __________________ As to using car sales as an indicator of the economy, I whole heartily agree. Back in 2006 I remember my car dealer boss lamenting times were tough. In 2007 it was the worse they had ever seen. Same thing my brother-in-law said at the time as he worked as the comptroller for a different dealership chain. At that time, nobody but buy gold bullion type folks were forecasting this economy. But the indications were there. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:34 AM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands