Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
01-20-2013 | 06:10 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,058
Likes: 2
From: Capt
01-20-2013 | 07:01 AM
Doing Nothing
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,316
Likes: 0
Its the Falcons. There's no way the Falcons are going to stop the 49ers run game. Then they'll load the box and Kaep will burn them in the passing game. Keep Matty Ice off the field and 49ers win big!!
01-20-2013 | 07:06 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,058
Likes: 2
From: Capt
San Francisco 49ers – Niner Insider Blog – SFGate.com » 49ers-Falcons rivalry mostly lopsided
Its the Falcons. There's no way the Falcons are going to stop the 49ers run game. Then they'll load the box and Kaep will burn them in the passing game. Keep Matty Ice off the field and 49ers win big!!
Its the Falcons. There's no way the Falcons are going to stop the 49ers run game. Then they'll load the box and Kaep will burn them in the passing game. Keep Matty Ice off the field and 49ers win big!!
01-20-2013 | 07:07 AM
Doing Nothing
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,316
Likes: 0
01-20-2013 | 07:10 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,457
Likes: 0
From: LAX ERA
The problem with the SD "we could begin the hiring process as early as the last quarter of this year" memo on June 8th, it came a bit too close to the vote to be anything but trying to up the ante to get this thing passed.
In the meantime we heard on here the 717 meant 500 pilots, 750 pilots, 800 pilots, 900, 1000, 1200, 1000, 1200, etc.
To be honest, I don't doubt that Flight Ops wanted to hire just to save face with the pilot group next time they make a promise in a memo. But that's the thing, get it writing or it doesn't mean anything.
I have a feeling as time passes we're going to see Pinnacle Pilots left holding the bag, just like anyone who was hoping the 717 meant hiring. And just maybe 2012-2013 will be the last time we accept things without having them in writing and not a vague promise in a memo, and in hard numbers, not in questionable ratios.
In the meantime we heard on here the 717 meant 500 pilots, 750 pilots, 800 pilots, 900, 1000, 1200, 1000, 1200, etc.
To be honest, I don't doubt that Flight Ops wanted to hire just to save face with the pilot group next time they make a promise in a memo. But that's the thing, get it writing or it doesn't mean anything.
I have a feeling as time passes we're going to see Pinnacle Pilots left holding the bag, just like anyone who was hoping the 717 meant hiring. And just maybe 2012-2013 will be the last time we accept things without having them in writing and not a vague promise in a memo, and in hard numbers, not in questionable ratios.
01-20-2013 | 08:17 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
Hockey,
I agree with you - the company really did hint, no not even hint, insinuate that we would hire if the TA was passed. Total BS and shame on anyone if that swayed their vote.
I voted yes and would vote yes again. Not because of BS Press releases by the company. I really cannot fathom that any DAL Pilot would actually vote one way or another based on anything that the company says it "might" do.
I have been on property since early 2000 and will never believe another word the company says about: future aircraft orders, RJs developing a market for Mainline growth, DAL being poised for (anything), or any future goodies that will appear if we will just do _________ .
I am not saying that these things will not happen - they might. But they will happen regardless of what we Pilots do. The company will buy aircraft when it is in its best interest of the company to buy planes. They will enter into codeshares, JVs, outsource, whatever - when it is in the best interest of the company to do so. That is what they are paid to do.
Anyone who votes one way or another because of what DAL management says they "might" do are fools. I don't think many of my fellow Pilots are fools. I think most guys weighed the Pros and Cons and voted accordingly. This is certainly what I did. FWIW the 717s are still coming, we will hire and probably hire more with this new contract. Did the company mislead us on their plans to hire? Only if we were foolish enough to believe them.
Scoop
I agree with you - the company really did hint, no not even hint, insinuate that we would hire if the TA was passed. Total BS and shame on anyone if that swayed their vote.
I voted yes and would vote yes again. Not because of BS Press releases by the company. I really cannot fathom that any DAL Pilot would actually vote one way or another based on anything that the company says it "might" do.
I have been on property since early 2000 and will never believe another word the company says about: future aircraft orders, RJs developing a market for Mainline growth, DAL being poised for (anything), or any future goodies that will appear if we will just do _________ .
I am not saying that these things will not happen - they might. But they will happen regardless of what we Pilots do. The company will buy aircraft when it is in its best interest of the company to buy planes. They will enter into codeshares, JVs, outsource, whatever - when it is in the best interest of the company to do so. That is what they are paid to do.
Anyone who votes one way or another because of what DAL management says they "might" do are fools. I don't think many of my fellow Pilots are fools. I think most guys weighed the Pros and Cons and voted accordingly. This is certainly what I did. FWIW the 717s are still coming, we will hire and probably hire more with this new contract. Did the company mislead us on their plans to hire? Only if we were foolish enough to believe them.
Scoop
Sailing argued that the initial hiring would have been small, and was snuffed out by a small RMA and large mil leave return. Maybe. Either way you cut the numbers, the retirements are slow in ramping up, and the 717 deliveries were not immediate. So, even if I thought SD was accurate, I didn't think we would have a large wave of hiring until retirements and 717 deliveries were both really steady.
Unless there is another shell game hidden in there, it seems like they're just delaying the inevitable until they get to the almost unmanageable. Which would be SOP for airline hiring.
01-20-2013 | 08:24 AM
Kerbal Rocket Surgeon
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,099
Likes: 0
From: DTW 717A
01-20-2013 | 08:30 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
And Scoop another point:
Your logic is going to be even more pertinent, when we start negotiating over the Virgin Atlantic TA. I suspect this one is going to be sold based on future results: "This is what's going to happen", and "here are the benefits we will get out of this TA". Rather than a faith-based approach, we're going to need percentages upfront, hard numbers, hard dates, and harder penalties. No reconciliation period, no resets, and no code placed on each-other's flights until each side is doing their appropriate share of flying.
Your logic is going to be even more pertinent, when we start negotiating over the Virgin Atlantic TA. I suspect this one is going to be sold based on future results: "This is what's going to happen", and "here are the benefits we will get out of this TA". Rather than a faith-based approach, we're going to need percentages upfront, hard numbers, hard dates, and harder penalties. No reconciliation period, no resets, and no code placed on each-other's flights until each side is doing their appropriate share of flying.
01-20-2013 | 08:31 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
And Scoop another point:
Your logic is going to be even more pertinent, when we start negotiating over the Virgin Atlantic TA. I suspect this one is going to be sold based on future results: "This is what's going to happen", and "here are the benefits we will get out of this TA". Rather than a faith-based approach, we're going to need percentages upfront, hard numbers, hard dates, and harder penalties. No reconciliation period, no resets, and no code placed on each-other's flights until each side is doing their appropriate share of flying.
Your logic is going to be even more pertinent, when we start negotiating over the Virgin Atlantic TA. I suspect this one is going to be sold based on future results: "This is what's going to happen", and "here are the benefits we will get out of this TA". Rather than a faith-based approach, we're going to need percentages upfront, hard numbers, hard dates, and harder penalties. No reconciliation period, no resets, and no code placed on each-other's flights until each side is doing their appropriate share of flying.
01-20-2013 | 08:32 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
