|
|
Originally Posted by georgetg
(Post 1380338)
Johnso, not sure if you actually read the referenced Operational Excellence memo from KS.
The inefficiencies mentioned, are in the context of reducing gate latency and taxi time... BTW, I'm not against improving our operation... I'm just not sure how the law of unintended consequences will create some interesting results when gate-latency and D-0 are pitted against each other... Do the airlines with the lower taxi times have the same success rate as Delta when it comes to D-0? Should the APU-sheriff be made the Gate-sheriff to ensure a marshaling crew is ready when a jet pulls up at a gate? Cheers George George, I haven't read it yet. Thanks for filling me in. My response was to what's highlighted below.
Originally Posted by FlyZ
(Post 1380217)
From the Excellence email, "as we cut inefficiencies out of the operation, Delta can funnel more flying back into the schedule to further benefit us all."
I might edit that to say as we cut inefficiencies out of the operation, Delta can continue to cut the number of pilots required and put off hiring for another two, three, or even four years. That was probably the version that went up the chain...we saw the one that came down. |
Airline economics is so depressing.
Time for a Wednesday morning mental health break. Girls with hula hoops. |
Originally Posted by scambo1
(Post 1380402)
While you regale your decent deal, do you remember that you were lied to many times by the agent you pay to bargain for you? Do you look at the outsourcing and growth at code share partners, JVs and alliances and say your deal is decent?
Your deal is better than being kicked in the nutz, but it could have been much better. How do you know? I've been trying to dig into where ALPA gets it's numbers from and best I can tell (and I could be wrong because they are pretty secretive) the primary source is Delta management and whatever Delta management reports to the Feds on DOT Form 41. (JMHO follows) D-ALPA is characterized by its conservatism. It does not want to go out on a limb and risk being wrong, ever. It does not want to ever lose. Many years ago I bragged about my trial record to my boss, who replied "If you win all of your trials, you are not trying enough." It was his opinion that 50/50 meant you were pushing as hard as you could push. While I don't agree completely with his position, he had a point. If D-ALPA pushes, they are going to lose from time to time. That's fine with me; but, are our pilots who view this from 50,000 feet at Mach 3 going to understand the process and why really trying means the occasional loss? |
Also, we just covered only a small portion of the 717s on this last Advanced Displacement bid, hopefully the next few bids will actually be, ........... dare I say it, "Advanced Entitlements." :eek:
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1380261)
Actually, over half of the TOTAL B717 positions were funded via AE. Very few came from displacements.
Johnson, My point was that overall the Bid was disappointing to many because the huge number of displacements cancelled out much of the potential upward movement. I am hoping the next AE will have all/mostly AE's with little displacements. Trying to be optimistic. Also, not sure that we have staffed, sorry, "funded," half of 88 jets with that last bid. Unless I am mistaken (happens often) At 7 crews per A/C we will need about 600 crews total Scoop :) |
Now if only Delta could do that!
This forum is way too dreary and negative focused lately! I want more of everything too but complaining here is not gonna do it! So lets focus on other things that are fun to focus on! Red tomato's!!!
Air india Cracking down on the "professionals". (Can one be a professional by answering an ad in the newspaper?) Imagine actually having to be fit to preform emergency duties! Shape up or don't fly, Air India tells cabin crew over 40 - Travel Kit on NBCNews.com |
Originally Posted by Scoop
(Post 1380455)
Also, we just covered only a small portion of the 717s on this last Advanced Displacement bid, hopefully the next few bids will actually be, ........... dare I say it, "Advanced Entitlements." :eek:
Johnson, My point was that overall the Bid was disappointing to many because the huge number of displacements cancelled out much of the potential upward movement. I am hoping the next AE will have all/mostly AE's with little displacements. Trying to be optimistic. Also not sure that we have staffed, sorry, "funded," half of 88 jets with that last bid. Unless I am mistaken (happens often) At 7 crews per A/C we will need about 600 crews total Scoop :) Scoop, I meant over half of the available B717 vacancies filled on the previous bid were filled via AE. :) |
Hmm Doug Parker!!
|
|
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1380459)
Scoop,
I meant over half of the available B717 vacancies filled on the previous bid were filled via AE. :) Gotcha. Hey, is it 7 crews per A/C or 7 Pilots, now I am not even sure. :confused: Scoop |
Originally Posted by Scoop
(Post 1380475)
Gotcha. Hey, is it 7 crews per A/C or 7 Pilots, now I am not even sure. :confused:
Scoop |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:32 AM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands