Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > Delta
Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? >

Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?


Notices

Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Old 03-03-2013 | 06:59 AM
  #124501  
forgot to bid's Avatar
veut gagner à la loterie
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
Default

Deleted......
Old 03-03-2013 | 07:15 AM
  #124502  
nwaf16dude's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,890
Likes: 0
From: 737A
Default

A South African 747 combi had a nasty cargo fire that led to a crash in the Indian Ocean back in the 1987. Some of the rules were changed to add more fire-fighting equipment which added weight which, in turn made combis less economical.

Interesting story...google SAA 295.
Old 03-03-2013 | 07:27 AM
  #124503  
XtremeF150's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,182
Likes: 0
From: M88B
Default

It does seem like I remember some FAR that said the cargo had to be forward of the PAX but I guess those foreign airlines don't have to comply with U.S. rules to fly into the U.S.?
Old 03-03-2013 | 07:33 AM
  #124504  
forgot to bid's Avatar
veut gagner à la loterie
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
Default

Originally Posted by XtremeF150
It does seem like I remember some FAR that said the cargo had to be forward of the PAX but I guess those foreign airlines don't have to comply with U.S. rules to fly into the U.S.?
When cargo is put between the pilots and the passengers, cargo nets become hammocks.

Old 03-03-2013 | 07:33 AM
  #124505  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by XtremeF150
It does seem like I remember some FAR that said the cargo had to be forward of the PAX but I guess those foreign airlines don't have to comply with U.S. rules to fly into the U.S.?

Ha ha...

I knew studying for the FE written would pay off at some point. (at least I think I remember -cargo forward of pax- being subject matter on the FE written)
Old 03-03-2013 | 07:48 AM
  #124506  
forgot to bid's Avatar
veut gagner à la loterie
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
Unde the old contract you were never full at 70. You were full at the ALV every single month. New contract you are now full at the reseve guarantee. The average pilot at Delta has 6 plus known absences a year. If the ALV is 77 your now full at 75 hours verses 77 on the old contract. If you have a week of vacation your now full at 54:15 vice 77 in the old contract. Alv15 and other changes will cost us jobs. Other changes gained jobs the net effect will be less then 150 jobs system wide.
You're right it was ALV.



And yes ALV-2 but min of 72 and capped at 80 is the reserve guarantee. You can still fly to ALV+15 and in a month with a 84 ALV that means a reserve can fly to 99 hours. Right?

99 hours. That's a lot.

Now as to how many jobs this cut, if we were gaining jobs through the TA why in these investors calls are they saying the higher pilot pay through greater proficiency? Proficiency doesn't seem to be more pilots doing the same amount of flying.
Old 03-03-2013 | 08:16 AM
  #124507  
RonRicco's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 833
Likes: 5
From: Captain
Default

Originally Posted by forgot to bid
We're saying staff the airline with something other than GSs, like pilots.

GS's are one thing in IROPS or we are hiring, using it every weekend is another. In my category, every Saturday and Sunday this month is below required staffing and it's only the 3rd. A year or so ago you could get those guys from the weekdays to cover it but now they cut reserves by 20% overall (since January and despite a jump in the ALV) so they're really are not any guys to borrow.

Meanwhile, they say the category is overstaffed and they want pilots to leave. I don't doubt they're telling the truth. My question is just how few pilots do they want to run a category like ATL M88 with? Is this a sign of how they will be able to run things going forward?

Really, the only day that gives you the true staffing level is the very first day that pcs is run. This is the day you will see how many "extra" reserves there are over the required number. After that, pilots will have dropped and swapped down to the "required" number.

Based on the 88b, it looks like most of your weekends were above the "required" number to start the month which also is why you see so many extras during the week... The "required" number could be artificially increased (preventing drops etc) and then the odds of green slips going out would be less, but in the mean time somebody did miss out on a GS and several people may have been denied x day moves, drops etc...

More pilots in your category does not by default fix what you desire because even if you had 20 more pilots on the weekends to start, odds are pilots are going to pcs away, or move x days to weekends till the "required" number is reached.

I am curious what you are specifically saying you would like to see wrt weekend coverage? The only thing that I can see that would more or less fix it for you is artificlly raising the "required" number.

Last edited by johnso29; 03-03-2013 at 10:15 AM.
Old 03-03-2013 | 08:23 AM
  #124508  
Moderator
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,263
Likes: 105
From: DAL 330
Default

Originally Posted by RonRicco
When it comes to reserves and weekend staffing, you guys really need to think through this a little more. Pilots complain like crazy about not being able to swap, drop etc because of reserve coverage, so the formula is changed to a more realistic number which means that the first day the schedules are released that there is a much great chance of being able to do something with a weekend trip or on call day. So, during the first pcs run pilots start working to get weekends off that have excess reserve coverage and you end up with some fat days during the week and what should be even numbers on the weekend (up until misc trps are dropped, created etc) which prevents further pcs changes for the most part.

Are people actually proposing that we keep reserve coverage higher on the weekends so that pilots can't pd, swap etc so a pilot that is on reserve may not be as likely to fly on his on call days? Really?

Ron,

+ 1000!

Some on here continually lament every aspect about the reserve system including the following:

Too many short-calls - we used to have two short-call windows every day.
Too many Pilots required on the weekend - so they cant drop these days.
Not enough Pilots required on the weekend - some poor soul gets a GS.
Pay on reserve sucks - It was 70 hours.
Guys on Reserve never break guarantee.
Guys on Reserve will be forced to fly ALV+15 every month.
ALV + 15 is why we are not hiring, even though Reserve only constitutes a small minority of DAL Pilots and we have not actually seen this yet. The fact that the vast majority of DAL Pilots are line-holders some who routinely fly up to 90 hours a month seems not to matter, even though it negatively affects hiring much more than the reserve rules.


Guys - Reserve at DAL is probably better than it has ever been. Can and should we still try to improve it - absolutely. We will be in section 6 in two years and will then have actual numbers and facts which we can analyze to see what changes we should prioritize.


Stand by for current political paraphrase:

"Reserve at DAL it is not the Apocalypse that some around here have been saying it is."

Who said it and about what?

Scoop
Old 03-03-2013 | 08:29 AM
  #124509  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,876
Likes: 193
Default

Originally Posted by forgot to bid
You're right it was ALV.



And yes ALV-2 but min of 72 and capped at 80 is the reserve guarantee. You can still fly to ALV+15 and in a month with a 84 ALV that means a reserve can fly to 99 hours. Right?

99 hours. That's a lot.

Now as to how many jobs this cut, if we were gaining jobs through the TA why in these investors calls are they saying the higher pilot pay through greater proficiency? Proficiency doesn't seem to be more pilots doing the same amount of flying.
We did not gain any jobs in this TA. WE lost a very small number of jobs. It's difficult to decrease productivity and increase jobs when you are already one of the less productive airlines. It's a tough sell through the NMB where we would have ended up.
There is one other aspect not mentioned and not costed for jobs in this contract. I am flying less with the raises. My total income is not going up but I am working less. That's my choice but several friends are doing the same. That will add jobs over time.
Old 03-03-2013 | 08:46 AM
  #124510  
MrBojangles's Avatar
Line Holder
10 Years
 
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 643
Likes: 52
Default

All I know is i've been working my butt off on reserve compared to a year or two ago. Getting 6 short calls most months instead of 2 or 3 in the past. As I've stated before about the ALV+15-it doesn't matter whether or not we actually fly to that number-it's the fact that we CAN, and that's why we need less bodies. Theres lots of "leeway" now in how many hours we can work. I just don't see how some of you guys don't understand this.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
On Autopilot
Regional
22617
11-05-2021 07:03 AM
AeroCrewSolut
Delta
153
08-14-2018 12:18 PM
Bill Lumberg
Major
71
06-13-2012 08:36 AM
Quagmire
Major
253
04-16-2011 06:19 AM
JiffyLube
Major
12
03-07-2008 04:27 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices