Airline Pilot Central Forums - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)

- - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/36912-any-latest-greatest-about-delta.html)

;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by texavia (Post 1220683)

I'll get you another pair of rose colored glasses for Christmas if you'll tell me where you got the ones you're wearing.

Only if you promise to wear them too.:D

P.S. If you would just lower your expectations like I have learned to do, the disappointment pill would be much easier to swallow.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeadHead (Post 1220662)

I know you are attempting to be coy with your ironic tone, but I'll humor you for a second anyway.

When the union members take a stance to hold the line on scope, we are told that the company must do what it needs to from a fleet planning standpoint to stay viable and remain profitable. Essentially DALPA endorses the use of bigger RJs under lower work rules and compensation as a route to make the company more profitable. We are told that we should look at this from an unemotional standpoint while realizing management cannot, and should not, make aircraft purchases to appease the pilot labor group. We have been drilled by DALPA to accept fleet planning/purchase are BUSINESS decisions plain and simple.

So maybe you can understand why I have a little problem when Sailing comes on here and talks down to us peons about how management is spending 2 billion to purchase B717s for us. It's a business decision, plains and simple, and the order in itself carries very little mileage for me when I look at this TA.

I could careless what aircraft they purchase going forward, as long as most of those aircraft are coming here and being flown by DAL pilots.

Once again, spoken like we are in charge. We are not, and we have only limited powers to control our destiny. I'm not sure that Sailing was talking down to us. I think he was just trying to make a point. Not many on this thread seem to give a flip about the company's health and the bottom line. That topic seems to be completely irrelevant to many here. Too many want to just ignore the facts about running a highly cash dependent business. I too want to milk the cow for what we can get, but I want to be able to milk it over and over and over. Not just this once. Quite the analogy huh? I wish that aircraft acquisitions weren’t even a part of our TA’s, but they are. I too would like to see the DCI’s go away, but I’m realistic enough to know it will never happen, so I built a bridge and got over it. Mostly anyway.

Quote:

Originally Posted by texavia (Post 1220632)

So what!

If my job is to make pizzas, it ain't my place to buy a pizza oven for the boss!

And I don't give a damn what his pizza oven costs him!

So I guess you always keep your cars new and under warranty. I mean why would you ever risk paying for maintenance and repairs. By your logic the cost of replacing your old cars is zero!

Delta has often made aircraft decisions based on when they needed major overhauls. With or without this TA I suspect some of those aircraft will be parked over time. Eventually they all will as will every aircraft in our fleet. They will be replaced with newer aircraft when management feels that it is cost effective to do so. Nothing different is going on here with the RJ's. The fact of the matter is that the company is going to have to put out more cash for the replacement aircraft then the overhauls cost. Should we count that extra cash as a credit to the pilot group in the contract? If you count the overhaul costs as a debit surely the replacement costs are a credit.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Co...otoblog600.jpg

Just ignore this, I just wanted to see if I could post a picture. Ignore the content. It means absolutely nothing. Nothing to see here, move along.:D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Waves (Post 1220697)

;)
If you would just lower your expectations like I have learned to do, the disappointment pill would be much easier to swallow.

It would make it easier. Too bad it was our own "union" lowering our expectations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Waves (Post 1220658)

No one says that aren't any flaws in it. Not even the MEC says that. Just another false statement.

Perhaps I missed the statement from the MEC explaining the flaws. Perhaps you could point me to it.

To be honest, the only thing I saw was something along the line of we know the pay rates didn't quite measure up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dragon (Post 1220758)

How quickly you forget that the NNP's and also the roadshow presentation showed that ALV/summer months calendar change could result in up to 300 less pilots needed in staffing for reserves. That was harped upon relentlessly on this board, of course they like to forget about the 175 positions added due to staffing changes also. But I think you get the point.

Got to say I don't think the MEC was hiding the aspect that aspect of the new PWA.:cool:

Quote:

Originally Posted by dragon (Post 1220758)

Chairman's Letter dated June 15 is just one place. There are plenty of others.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiznit (Post 1220770)

Ok, I guess I've been a bit hard on the NNP. They did talk about the lost pilot jobs and did mention it was in order to accomplish the higher reserve guarantee.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Waves (Post 1220776)

Chairman's Letter dated June 15 is just one place. There are plenty of others.

I guess you're right. I was hoping for something better and try as I could, I just couldn't get behind this contract. I'll work under it, but won't ever expect the ba$tards I pay to look out for the pilot group again.