Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
07-26-2013 | 06:45 AM
seeing the country...
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,014
Likes: 41
From: 73N A
I'm not asking for a long response, I know they are busy and have lives, but a two sentence reply - I got your email, thanks and here's briefly what I think, wouldn't be too hard would it?
07-26-2013 | 07:11 AM
Works Every Weekend
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,506
Likes: 0
From: 737 ATL
Europe still is in the tank, what do want DAL to do, fly widely unprofitable flying just so we can progress or do you prefer them to execute the business plan that is trending above 2billion a year in profit?
If Europe ever recovers and medium to high yield ridership returns we stand to profit greatly on the balance of block hr flying on the TAJV. It was a JV that was built for upside growth. Kind of hard to have that for the last five years when the world economy has been in the crapper. Sucks but that is a harsh reality.
Non-complinace comes at a price. My Rep is very aware of it, and wants to know what the lack of progression and jobs has cost this group. It we get to 2015 and he is still in office he will push the issue, and hard, but thinking that DAL will fork over billions in new jets to pacify this non-complinace is a pipe dream.
On a second note, AF's ability to pull down flying was affected by French law prohibiting much of it. In the first part of this year, that low was watered down and AF pulled down a lot of flying.
Non-compliance is non-complinace and is dealt with through a grievance or negotiation. Nothing new here.
If Europe ever recovers and medium to high yield ridership returns we stand to profit greatly on the balance of block hr flying on the TAJV. It was a JV that was built for upside growth. Kind of hard to have that for the last five years when the world economy has been in the crapper. Sucks but that is a harsh reality.
Non-complinace comes at a price. My Rep is very aware of it, and wants to know what the lack of progression and jobs has cost this group. It we get to 2015 and he is still in office he will push the issue, and hard, but thinking that DAL will fork over billions in new jets to pacify this non-complinace is a pipe dream.
On a second note, AF's ability to pull down flying was affected by French law prohibiting much of it. In the first part of this year, that low was watered down and AF pulled down a lot of flying.
Non-compliance is non-complinace and is dealt with through a grievance or negotiation. Nothing new here.
(but isn't that exactly what Air France and Alitalia are doing?)
I digress.
I just want to see ALPA show a little spine for the first time in a decade. The RLA and the NMB will not be involved. Our contract is signed and in effect.
We need to cost out the damages we are suffering as a result of giving up our scope clause and then make management pay us. I am sick and tired of the continuous small modifications to our contract that allow just a little bit more outsourcing every time and us getting nothing in return.
You say deal with it through a grievance.
The last time we settled a scope grievance Moak gave up on the 76 seater numerical limit in exchange for nothing except "clarifying" the language. (we'll get 'em next time) And then that language was superseded in the new contract anyway. That's bull****. Its that kind of "constructive engagement" that really makes ALPA look like a branch of management.
ENFORCE MY CONTRACT !! And if management comes to us claiming that changed circumstances absolutely dictate some modifications, then SHOW ME THE MONEY !
07-26-2013 | 07:13 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
From: 7ERA
Sam Mason does a great job for our pilots.
Back when this deal was done (and immediately appeared in peril) the CS Committee pointed out we were tracking about where we had been prior to inclusion of Alitalia in our JV. As stated in the previous post, our MEC wants to grow our flying and achieving growth was thought to be well worth the "price" (my characterization) of the expanded measurement window. At the the time it was management's stated intention to grow to 50% of the bigger pie (with AZ filling). Then the European economic decline occurred and Air France was no where near as nimble as Delta in constraining capacity. (news reports at that time reflected the stress Air France and Delta had maintaining their liason amoureuse)
Things are changing and Delta's nimble. The British economy is rebounding well and we just added a 7ER flight from Seattle to Heathrow.
As I understand it, the VA JV (which is supposed to be live by 1/1/14) is not going to be rolled into our current transatlantic JV. If this continues to be the case then it is probably better for us than adding Virgin to our share. I would argue we are splitting the Atlantic; this is not the "English Channel Joint Venture."
Also, Delta said they are not going to merge numbers in any way with Virgin. So we will be able to track the results of that operation transparently on Delta's reports. We here in the bleachers can see that game being played out. The Seattle flight is a win.
Also, we have hit our metrics ... time for a Widebody acquisition ... JMHO.
Back when this deal was done (and immediately appeared in peril) the CS Committee pointed out we were tracking about where we had been prior to inclusion of Alitalia in our JV. As stated in the previous post, our MEC wants to grow our flying and achieving growth was thought to be well worth the "price" (my characterization) of the expanded measurement window. At the the time it was management's stated intention to grow to 50% of the bigger pie (with AZ filling). Then the European economic decline occurred and Air France was no where near as nimble as Delta in constraining capacity. (news reports at that time reflected the stress Air France and Delta had maintaining their liason amoureuse)
Things are changing and Delta's nimble. The British economy is rebounding well and we just added a 7ER flight from Seattle to Heathrow.
As I understand it, the VA JV (which is supposed to be live by 1/1/14) is not going to be rolled into our current transatlantic JV. If this continues to be the case then it is probably better for us than adding Virgin to our share. I would argue we are splitting the Atlantic; this is not the "English Channel Joint Venture."
Also, Delta said they are not going to merge numbers in any way with Virgin. So we will be able to track the results of that operation transparently on Delta's reports. We here in the bleachers can see that game being played out. The Seattle flight is a win.
Also, we have hit our metrics ... time for a Widebody acquisition ... JMHO.
On the surface that sounds like an amazing idea, but think of this.....
We have been overstaffed the entire time we have been in the three year measurement period since AZ jointed the NAJV, correct? We have been very overstaffed on many WB jets; company decision. The 330, 744, and 777 have been over staffed to the point of MD's. The ER has just seen over 100 FO seats removed because they are so far over staffed from the operational formula. I am sure we all agree on this.
I would venture to bet, that if you used a staffing formula for your non-complinace you would realize that we would have been well above the extra staffing needed to staff the 7 333's from DTW to AMS that it would take to be in compliance.
Now I know you are going to retort that it has to be for staffing on jets that fly in the JV, but this summer all of them are. We have 777's to AMS, and 330's all over the place. I even think there is a 744 doing Euro service this summer.
Point is that we have probably been adequately staffed for your suggestion the last few years given the level of over staffing that we have experienced. If that was your financial quid, then the company already paid, eh?
07-26-2013 | 07:14 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
When you leave the 88 for the er, you will not want to leave. If you survived a decade on the 88 with all your hair, it will start growing in Viking blonde. You will gain a little weight until you figure out not to eat everything offered. You will sleep in comfortable hotels in nice places. You will become a beer snob even if you don't drink. You will think you've been $crewed unless you have at least 1 Germany per month on your line. Green slips will be fun to fly. You will be epic.
Having metaphorically described the career path of every Delta pilot I know ... here's your new ride:
... now the question is, which one?
07-26-2013 | 07:24 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
From: 7ERA
I digress...
I just want to see ALPA show a little spine for the first time in a decade. The RLA and the NMB will not be involved. Our contract is signed and in effect.
On the Pacific, a pithy Fifth Freedom Code Share agreement is all that keeps 316 weekly slots as a floor. RA stated in the earnings call that NRT is stable and the growth is from Transpac additions. Were is your leverage to show you the money, with a steel spine?
We need to cost out the damages we are suffering as a result of giving up our scope clause and then make management pay us. I am sick and tired of the continuous small modifications to our contract that allow just a little bit more outsourcing every time and us getting nothing in return.
You say deal with it through a grievance.
The last time we settled a scope grievance Moak gave up on the 76 seater numerical limit in exchange for nothing except "clarifying" the language. (we'll get 'em next time) And then that language was superseded in the new contract anyway. That's bull****. Its that kind of "constructive engagement" that really makes ALPA look like a branch of management.
ENFORCE MY CONTRACT !! And if management comes to us claiming that changed circumstances absolutely dictate some modifications, then SHOW ME THE MONEY !
You say deal with it through a grievance.
The last time we settled a scope grievance Moak gave up on the 76 seater numerical limit in exchange for nothing except "clarifying" the language. (we'll get 'em next time) And then that language was superseded in the new contract anyway. That's bull****. Its that kind of "constructive engagement" that really makes ALPA look like a branch of management.
ENFORCE MY CONTRACT !! And if management comes to us claiming that changed circumstances absolutely dictate some modifications, then SHOW ME THE MONEY !
You think that DALPA is not tolling the costs? GMAB.
Any grievance would come from the MEC on this one, and if the Chair tried to do it on his own, I do not think that would end well, alas if may be a new chair and diffinately a new MEC since we are talking 2015. Every base has elections that will put new people in except ATL, DTW and SLC, they just got elected.
07-26-2013 | 07:30 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
You raise an interesting point and I'd dare say ALPA's been working on that calculation. Very early when this was calculated it is my understanding the result was as published ... enough crews to staff for the 7 330's from the Motor City to the Stoner City and back again. The choice of the 330 probably means, what, 10 to 12 7ER's to generate EASK balance?
The fact the Company's been squeezing the list to staff the bottom ( MD88 / 717 ) from the middle (76 & ER to 320 & 737 to MD88 & 717 ) suggests if the Company had held extra staffing that they aren't doing so any more.
Yours is an interesting theory. But, not interested if it is a trial balloon for excused noncompliance. We've really got to do something to alleviate stagnation that results in the vast majority of our narrow body First Officers being qualified for membership in AARP.
07-26-2013 | 07:38 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
From: 7ERA
Rogue,
You raise an interesting point and I'd dare say ALPA's been working on that calculation. Very early when this was calculated it is my understanding the result was as published ... enough crews to staff for the 7 330's from the Motor City to the Stoner City and back again.
The fact the Company's been squeezing the list to staff the bottom ( MD88 / 717 ) from the middle (76 & ER to 320 & 737 to MD88 & 717 ) suggests if the Company had held extra staffing that they aren't doing so any more.
Yours is an interesting theory. But, not interested if it is a trial balloon for excused noncompliance. We've really got to do something to alleviate stagnation that results in the vast majority of our narrow body First Officers being qualified for membership in AARP.
You raise an interesting point and I'd dare say ALPA's been working on that calculation. Very early when this was calculated it is my understanding the result was as published ... enough crews to staff for the 7 330's from the Motor City to the Stoner City and back again.
The fact the Company's been squeezing the list to staff the bottom ( MD88 / 717 ) from the middle (76 & ER to 320 & 737 to MD88 & 717 ) suggests if the Company had held extra staffing that they aren't doing so any more.
Yours is an interesting theory. But, not interested if it is a trial balloon for excused noncompliance. We've really got to do something to alleviate stagnation that results in the vast majority of our narrow body First Officers being qualified for membership in AARP.
My point is if you want to toll and staff for those loses via seats, the look back would apply and we have had a lot of pilots sitting in seats that did not have flying attached to them. It may actually hurt you on a look back but may be a good idea going forward. Its in how it is done.
Taking EASK's and formalizing that in to seats not staffed may be the best bet for our pilots, but forcing a staffing solution on a look back may result in no need for payback to our group. Just food for thought. The whole, know the answer to the question before you ask it thing. It might be something that a resolution could make the MEC look at though.
07-26-2013 | 07:41 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
07-26-2013 | 07:50 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
From: 7ERA
07-26-2013 | 07:59 AM
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,263
Likes: 105
From: DAL 330
Food for thought:
On the surface that sounds like an amazing idea, but think of this.....
We have been overstaffed the entire time we have been in the three year measurement period since AZ jointed the NAJV, correct? We have been very overstaffed on many WB jets; company decision. The 330, 744, and 777 have been over staffed to the point of MD's. The ER has just seen over 100 FO seats removed because they are so far over staffed from the operational formula. I am sure we all agree on this.
I would venture to bet, that if you used a staffing formula for your non-complinace you would realize that we would have been well above the extra staffing needed to staff the 7 333's from DTW to AMS that it would take to be in compliance.
Now I know you are going to retort that it has to be for staffing on jets that fly in the JV, but this summer all of them are. We have 777's to AMS, and 330's all over the place. I even think there is a 744 doing Euro service this summer.
Point is that we have probably been adequately staffed for your suggestion the last few years given the level of over staffing that we have experienced. If that was your financial quid, then the company already paid, eh?
On the surface that sounds like an amazing idea, but think of this.....
We have been overstaffed the entire time we have been in the three year measurement period since AZ jointed the NAJV, correct? We have been very overstaffed on many WB jets; company decision. The 330, 744, and 777 have been over staffed to the point of MD's. The ER has just seen over 100 FO seats removed because they are so far over staffed from the operational formula. I am sure we all agree on this.
I would venture to bet, that if you used a staffing formula for your non-complinace you would realize that we would have been well above the extra staffing needed to staff the 7 333's from DTW to AMS that it would take to be in compliance.
Now I know you are going to retort that it has to be for staffing on jets that fly in the JV, but this summer all of them are. We have 777's to AMS, and 330's all over the place. I even think there is a 744 doing Euro service this summer.
Point is that we have probably been adequately staffed for your suggestion the last few years given the level of over staffing that we have experienced. If that was your financial quid, then the company already paid, eh?
Speaking of being overstaffed in WB Jets I have seen numerous company communications referring to WBs going into MOD, thus requiring less Pilots to man the fleet.
I do not recall ever seeing a communication saying something along the lines of ... "As the _____ finishes its MOD we will be increasing (really returning) flying thus requiring an AE to staff the _____ fleet."
Whats the deal? Are the MOD lines like the fabled Hotel California, aircraft can check out....... but they can never leave?
Scoop
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
