Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
09-04-2012 | 12:39 PM
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,263
Likes: 105
From: DAL 330
You assume that if we had a 100 percent scope clause at Delta all that flying would still be done. Thats a very bad assumption and would not be the case. I am also talking about changes since 2001. In June of 2001 we had the same number of pilot block hours at Delta as we did in June of 07 prior to the merger. We however had 3000 plus fewer pilots then we had in 01. The difference was and is work rules.
Sailing,
Maybe 2000 fewer Pilots and 1000 fewer FEs???? We still had a butt load of 727s in 2001 and I am pretty sure some L-10s also. But you know what, it does not matter,
Did we lose a ton of jobs to work rules - Yes!
Did we lose a ton of jobs to DCI - Yes!
Trying to minimize one over the other serves no purpose. We were obviously hurt by both and to a large degree by both.
Scoop
Last edited by Scoop; 09-04-2012 at 01:09 PM.
09-04-2012 | 12:48 PM
Banned
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 474
Likes: 0
You assume that if we had a 100 percent scope clause at Delta all that flying would still be done. Thats a very bad assumption and would not be the case. I am also talking about changes since 2001. In June of 2001 we had the same number of pilot block hours at Delta as we did in June of 07 prior to the merger. We however had 3000 plus fewer pilots then we had in 01. The difference was and is work rules.
09-04-2012 | 01:11 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
But their goal when they finally have a 717 bid is to, in a single bid, open the 717 category while closing the DC9 category to minimize training.
09-04-2012 | 01:19 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
FTB, waiting in line at Popeyes in Terminal B...
WHY IS EVERYONE YELLING!?!?!
WHY IS EVERYONE YELLING!?!?!
09-04-2012 | 01:42 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
From: 7ERB, no M88, no 7ER, no A320, NEXT!
Sailing,
First the 48 hr layo rule is one way to domesticate a pilot. It allows nine hrs of block. There are a few ways to reroute to efficiency on this sort of thing too. Yes, the nine hrs is hard time, and as you know as a NYC ER pilot there are many routes to JFK that fall well under that. A diversion is always a possibility, and one I would hope that DAL chooses to not make a major event by keeping IRO's on all flights over 8 hrs. It comes down to a math problem for their position and what they want from our PWA.
We can add a IRO when it looks like there is going to be a need on the Westbound leg; ie, NYC weather in two days, weather in Northern Europe ect. We could also DH that IRO over and they could put him up in Europe or Asia as a SC/LC pilot in our AMR and CDG ops plus a few other places. I would be watching for changes in the PWA that may allow that sort of thing.
You may say its outlandish, but rerouteing and out of the box thinking is exactly how this could be a jobs killer. Yes, the FT/DT is layered, but there are ways to make a pilot fly 9 hrs westbound. Yes, the current PWA prevents any ocean crossing over eight hrs from not going augmented, but that is a major ticket item. One that to me is not negotiable. We are currently protected from this, and IMO need to strengthen it. Ala the Caribbean turns.
Another front that concerns me is ULH pilot staffing. What does a 12+ hr flight via the FT/DT require versus what we staff on each of those flight? Could we see ULH rules that we currently enjoy changed? What could that do to staffing? Staffing in each seat?
The areas that could be jobs gainers are:
How we pay reserve pilots and rotation guarantee once assigned a trip. Reroutes will deal with many of the duty limit issues, and this is a sure fire way to make it net positive in that department.
We also are going to have to find a new normal wrt to the needed min time off per week that the FT/DT requires.
There are many nuggets that I am sure the scheduling and negotiation committee are looking at as areas that could cost pilots jobs, or pilot staffing gains. We just need to be very careful on what we agree to.
First the 48 hr layo rule is one way to domesticate a pilot. It allows nine hrs of block. There are a few ways to reroute to efficiency on this sort of thing too. Yes, the nine hrs is hard time, and as you know as a NYC ER pilot there are many routes to JFK that fall well under that. A diversion is always a possibility, and one I would hope that DAL chooses to not make a major event by keeping IRO's on all flights over 8 hrs. It comes down to a math problem for their position and what they want from our PWA.
We can add a IRO when it looks like there is going to be a need on the Westbound leg; ie, NYC weather in two days, weather in Northern Europe ect. We could also DH that IRO over and they could put him up in Europe or Asia as a SC/LC pilot in our AMR and CDG ops plus a few other places. I would be watching for changes in the PWA that may allow that sort of thing.
You may say its outlandish, but rerouteing and out of the box thinking is exactly how this could be a jobs killer. Yes, the FT/DT is layered, but there are ways to make a pilot fly 9 hrs westbound. Yes, the current PWA prevents any ocean crossing over eight hrs from not going augmented, but that is a major ticket item. One that to me is not negotiable. We are currently protected from this, and IMO need to strengthen it. Ala the Caribbean turns.
Another front that concerns me is ULH pilot staffing. What does a 12+ hr flight via the FT/DT require versus what we staff on each of those flight? Could we see ULH rules that we currently enjoy changed? What could that do to staffing? Staffing in each seat?
The areas that could be jobs gainers are:
How we pay reserve pilots and rotation guarantee once assigned a trip. Reroutes will deal with many of the duty limit issues, and this is a sure fire way to make it net positive in that department.
We also are going to have to find a new normal wrt to the needed min time off per week that the FT/DT requires.
There are many nuggets that I am sure the scheduling and negotiation committee are looking at as areas that could cost pilots jobs, or pilot staffing gains. We just need to be very careful on what we agree to.
Contact your reps people, let them know that you want to be involved in this process before its signed without our knowledge!
09-04-2012 | 01:44 PM
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
From: B717A
Still no availability of the Oct schedule thru EasyBid. I can, however, download the Oct ZIP file from the Crew Resources page. Is it possible to use this file for EasyBid?
09-04-2012 | 01:46 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,844
Likes: 0
From: 765-A
09-04-2012 | 01:53 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
It seems this LOA probably ought to meet the criteria for MEMRAT in addition to input upfront, actually.
09-04-2012 | 01:53 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
With the new extra x-day implemented in October for reserve pilots, I wonder how they are calculating this? I was almost sure my category was 20% but it's one of the extra x-day "no" categories.
What are they looking at? The category list vs the estimated lines?
What are they looking at? The category list vs the estimated lines?
09-04-2012 | 01:57 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
There are lots of things that will prevent what you think will happen. I am not worried about it. Even if they go to the 48 hour layover they run a much greater risk of getting the flight canceled. I have been told one jet laid down in Europe costs the company 250K. They will also have to pay both pilots credit for the extra day. On some trips the credit for the CA and FO would almost match the cost of just putting the extra pilot onboard. They also will require more reserves if they go to all 4 day trips and have fewer pilots available for GS or WS when weather wipes out NY. They would double their hotel costs. On top of all that as you mention are contract does not allow it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
