|
|
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1427755)
Really? I get lambasted everyday for my optimism. :rolleyes: One particular individual just labeled my optimism as a "BS campaign" that came "crashing into numbers". So excuse me for deflecting the constant barrage of negativity with a little snarky attitude now and then.
|
On second thought, he writes legibly, and often makes sense. I don't think he's more snarky in his optimistic outlook, than people are snarky in their negative outlook.
|
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1427753)
Correct on the 739s mostly, but the 717s are primarily going to be replacing the 50 seat lift as they are parked... the current trend vector now is the A319 doing that flying, actually.
|
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1427757)
You're not just now being snarky, all of your posts have had that overtone for a good while.
Well clearly my kind and gentle attitude got me no where. So guess what? Bring on snarky town!!! I'll fit right in!!! :cool: |
Originally Posted by DAL4EVER
(Post 1427702)
No I don't think so. We are the cheapest carrier of the major SkyTeam partners from a labor perspective. Yet they, not us, have 100+ large WBs. How many "high paying" jobs has that lost? We are tied to the past with our current pay structure. We only spend on average maybe 1/4-1/3 of our career in the higher paying categories. The rest of the time its less. We need to get away from thinking what we might make someday for a few good years. What if payscales were adjusted to LGBP allowing a pilot to capture more pay over his whole career and not chase planes or bases to do it? How many guys in ATL, CVG, MSP would be happier if they could avoid commuting to protect their pay?
1. Management will "sweep the legs" in any negotiations with ALPA, no doubt lowering their overall pilot costs and decreasing overall pilots pay. 2. LGP decreases staffing needs.....once again.....less hiring. 3. The senior guys with the help of ALPA would sell the Jr guys down the river....once again. Think boost for current 25 year guys and decreased pay for those below that compared to what they make now. |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1427759)
Fair enough, and you are correct. (So you changed your mind about getting rid of the 50s????? Now it is a good thing maybe???) But I will be absolutely speechless if the company ordered more than 10 WBs. 30 to 40 (without parking something bigger) and I would need CPR.
As has been shown by reality, the desire to operate the 50s and park them early is even greater than I anticipated, thus further negating the sales job of C2012... I agree with you on the widebody order. I keep hearing 10. |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1427759)
... I would need CPR.
|
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1427764)
When did I ever say getting rid of the 50s was a bad thing? I maintained that they were going away no matter the outcome of C2012 and the 717s were coming no matter what as well.
As has been shown by reality, the desire to operate the 50s and park them early is even greater than I anticipated, thus further negating the sales job of C2012... I agree with you on the widebody order. I keep hearing 10. |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1427768)
I don't want to reopen the C2012 argument.
|
Are you being snarky?
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:43 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands