Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
06-26-2012 | 07:17 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
From: FO forever
06-26-2012 | 07:21 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,831
Likes: 172
From: window seat
Not EGO at all, we have been sold regionals on the premise that it builds markets that someday will move to mainline. I don' see DFW-DTW as a market that needs to be built as other carriers serve the route with a mainline jet. So lets dig the company out of another big mistake,the 50 seater they want to dump now. How many millions have they lost on that great decision???
06-26-2012 | 07:32 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
From: A big one that looks like a little one
Originally Posted by keenster
Thanks for the support Ballbreaker!!!!!!
06-26-2012 | 07:51 AM
Line Holder
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 424
Likes: 1
From: B767 FO
SWA is a great airline and well run, but you work for one too. If I didn't work for FDX, DAL would be my next choice. Your managment is good management in today's airline world. 10 years is forever in the airline industry, 5 years is a stretch. 10 years ago FDX, UPS and SWA were just becoming the place to be while, AA, UAL, DAL, NWA had just become the places not be. (DAL has done an incredible job returning itself as a respectable airline. I know it is far from perfect, but all airlines are far from perfect.) Take a look at airline history, it has always been that way.
06-26-2012 | 08:21 AM
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 851
Likes: 0
what happened to our proposed GUM base?
06-26-2012 | 08:28 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 917
Likes: 0
06-26-2012 | 08:43 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
06-26-2012 | 08:55 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 602
Likes: 0
From: SLC 767ER Captain
What becomes obvious on this thread is that many pilots here seem to think WE are running this airline; that we should be calling ALL the shots. Who to hire. What aircraft to buy. What routes we should fly, Etc. I understand we all have a vested interest, but you guys make it sound as if we are in charge here. We aren't and probably never will be. Additionally, it probably wouldn't be a good thing if we were.
Control over our own destiny is somewhat limited. Would any of you strike over this TA if it came down to it? Have any of you figured out a time line for prolonged negotiations? Our current contract isn’t even amendable until Jan 2013. Meanwhile we have 598 RJ’s filling our gates. Do you really think we have the clout or leverage to force management into a scenario where they would buy these 76 seat aircraft and then have to park them in a few years? I doubt they could even get such a deal if they wanted to.
One thing in which we can all agree. Former Management ordered too many 50 seaters. Should we now punish them for it by making them eat them and thereby greatly reducing our financial bottom line? You know, this isn’t your last contract?
Lastly, this TA will probably pass anyway so we will not likely see what might have been. This TA is certainly far from perfect, but IMHO the risks of renegotiating a new one verses the possible perceived gains are too high. I could be wrong.
Control over our own destiny is somewhat limited. Would any of you strike over this TA if it came down to it? Have any of you figured out a time line for prolonged negotiations? Our current contract isn’t even amendable until Jan 2013. Meanwhile we have 598 RJ’s filling our gates. Do you really think we have the clout or leverage to force management into a scenario where they would buy these 76 seat aircraft and then have to park them in a few years? I doubt they could even get such a deal if they wanted to.
One thing in which we can all agree. Former Management ordered too many 50 seaters. Should we now punish them for it by making them eat them and thereby greatly reducing our financial bottom line? You know, this isn’t your last contract?
Lastly, this TA will probably pass anyway so we will not likely see what might have been. This TA is certainly far from perfect, but IMHO the risks of renegotiating a new one verses the possible perceived gains are too high. I could be wrong.
06-26-2012 | 08:56 AM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
06-26-2012 | 09:03 AM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
What becomes obvious on this thread is that many pilots here seem to think WE are running this airline; that we should be calling ALL the shots. Who to hire. What aircraft to buy. What routes we should fly, Etc. I understand we all have a vested interest, but you guys make it sound as if we are in charge here. We aren't and probably never will be. Additionally, it probably wouldn't be a good thing if we were.
Control over our own destiny is somewhat limited. Would any of you strike over this TA if it came down to it? Have any of you figured out a time line for prolonged negotiations? Our current contract isn’t even amendable until Jan 2013. Meanwhile we have 598 RJ’s filling our gates. Do you really think we have the clout or leverage to force management into a scenario where they would buy these 76 seat aircraft and then have to park them in a few years? I doubt they could even get such a deal if they wanted to.
One thing in which we can all agree. Former Management ordered too many 50 seaters. Should we now punish them for it by making them eat them and thereby greatly reducing our financial bottom line? You know, this isn’t your last contract?
Lastly, this TA will probably pass anyway so we will not likely see what might have been. This TA is certainly far from perfect, but IMHO the risks of renegotiating a new one verses the possible perceived gains are too high. I could be wrong.
Control over our own destiny is somewhat limited. Would any of you strike over this TA if it came down to it? Have any of you figured out a time line for prolonged negotiations? Our current contract isn’t even amendable until Jan 2013. Meanwhile we have 598 RJ’s filling our gates. Do you really think we have the clout or leverage to force management into a scenario where they would buy these 76 seat aircraft and then have to park them in a few years? I doubt they could even get such a deal if they wanted to.
One thing in which we can all agree. Former Management ordered too many 50 seaters. Should we now punish them for it by making them eat them and thereby greatly reducing our financial bottom line? You know, this isn’t your last contract?
Lastly, this TA will probably pass anyway so we will not likely see what might have been. This TA is certainly far from perfect, but IMHO the risks of renegotiating a new one verses the possible perceived gains are too high. I could be wrong.
We don't run the airline. Our current management team seems to be doing a pretty good job of the macro airline running job.
We, as unionized employees, do control our contract. An important aspect of that contract (IMO the most important) is section 1. Outsourcing more viable mainline replacement jets is definintely something I would strike against - definitely.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
