http://miasmaticreview.mu.nu/mt-stat...s/Mustache.JPG

MUST GO NOW!!! The CRJ-200s will stay forever if we don't sign! We will never order a new airplane! :D

Unless you are a DCI pilot, would someone please splain to me why less DCI RJ's, less DCI Pilots, less DCI ASM's, a lower DCI aircraft cap, a stricter block hour ratio, etc. accompanied with 88 new mainline aircraft is a bad thing, cause I’m just not getting it?:confused: What is it that I'm missing?

You have already been told this but you choose to play dumb. THIS TA BREATHS NEW LIFE INTO REGIONAL FLYING WITH NON DELTA PILOTS.

Geeeezzz Waves -- Jack Bauer knew exactly what it meant and posted a descriptive photo almost instantly.

Slow on the uptake much?

The concept as you put it is not a bad thing. The most basic issue is that the 70 new RJ's allowed are more efficient, will economically last longer for DCI than the 50's they are replacing and as a result no find a true solution to DCI but allow them to continue, abet smaller.

Some of the secondary issues are;
-The idea was to make DCI a accumulator with capacity reductions like we have seen here at mainline. The language does that, but the business plan puts the ratio at 1.76-1 and the top tier is 1.56-1. As a result, mainline still is the accumulator before DCI. Its better, but it is not good enough for allowing over double the amount of 76 seat RJ's that LOA 51 did, or two CPS airlines.

-The fact that there were no duration limits on the DCI CPA's that these jets would amend or term limits on how many jets could be renewed each time these CPA's would be come amendable.

-The "non-compliance" language is not specific to this language, and is boiler plate as others have pointed out. Non-compliance for this should include items like lease duration limits on acquired mainline jets, staffing constraints at mainline(given the future retirement wave) more specificity with words like "economy" or triggers to the word "economy" like the euro zone debt crisis; which would not be the economy, but something that triggers an economy, and could be used under a different context, et al.

Many do not like giving up more large RJ's; myself included, but could possibly see it as a win if there was a road map with checkpoints in the future that forced further DCI reductions, and reductions in large RJ's. This is a single faceted change that does not have multiple steps included down the road to solve the larger DCI outsourcing issue. It is sorta a one time hit and there needs to be some sort of "sunset". If this, and a one way check valve on the ratios over a two year rolling average, with a tighter cure period, I could see supporting the language.

I'd say no matter where you stand on the TA, it's a matter of placing value on things.

In my opinion my fellow Delta pilots are a fine bunch of aviators.
Sharp, intelligent the majority are even funny.
I wouldn't want to be associated with a finer bunch of people.

And yet you'll find division in the ranks.
Slam click or stay out late.
Water beer or wine.
Navy, Air Force or god forbid civilian.

Where some see a big reduction in DCI,
other see an increase in large RJs.

Where some see a gain from the speedier retirement of the 50-seater,
other see a tired unwanted jet that was due to go away on its own.

Where some see the benefit of making Delta's DCI operation more profitable,
other see a lifeline thrown to an industry segment in decline.

Where some see the pilot positions gained by introducing a new fleet type,
other lament the loss of pilot positions by work rule changes.

Where some see their captain seat finally arriving,
other see a downward shift in pay and career expectations.

Where some see industry leading pay-rates,
other see pay parity with our peers current pay reached years from now.

Where some see the ratios as ensuring flying will transfer from DCI to mainline,
other say not so fast only if DCI doesn't shrink and then just a little.

Where some see a gain in protection for future JV agreements,
other see a lower negotiating floor.

Where some see a gain for reserves,
others see a concession.

Depending on your perspective, you'll find your truth somewhere between all of that...

Apart from a select few "extremists", I haven't spoken with many that unequivocally value the TA as good or bad.

Cheers
George

That is probably the best explanation I have seen yet.

ACL, where did you get the 1.76-1 number? The numbers I got when I asked were company business plan we would do 64% of the flying, up from 54%. The floor would be 61%, so while there would be some accumulator action, it wouldn't be as large an amount as your numbers show.

Yes I was slow on the uptake. I didn't even look at Jack's picture. I get it now. I don't agree with it, but I get it. I still like the idea of scantily clothed ladies better. Ha

I'm completely with you that the ratio could be a little tighter. You have to get a ratio provision first. This happens now, we tighten it in 2.75 years on our next opener (or sooner if any "other" things happen before then).

I would absolutely LOVE to see sun-setting on all DCI.

There is NO WAY a company like SKYW, XJT, or CHQ would agree to amend and "help" DAL out of the 50 seater problem if it was already apparent that they would have future business relationship knowingly destroyed by a Delta Pilot scope clause.

Once the swaps are done (say 2.5 years from now....), we will be reopening our negotiations with DAL Inc.

Once the DCI's have already reduced size and are feeling safe, it will be easier to put sunset language into our scope clause because the DCI carrier CEO's won't have any leverage left. Once time starts to come up on agreements, easy to start reducing them further, allowing DAL to regain leverage over outsourced players, who currently hold a pretty strong hand at the table.

I remember hearing/reading over and over that "restoration will take more than one contract cycle."

DAL can't come and admit they will chop off the DCI airlines in 3-6 years, NOBODY would be willing to make a deal in this critical interim.

The leverage for DAL to amend these CPA's would be shot to hell if the company agreed to a sunset right now. I'm trying to take the long view on DAL pilot scope and DAL Inc.'s control of the product.