Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
07-31-2013 | 11:51 AM
Doing Nothing
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,316
Likes: 0
Can anyone else see the AE results? They are gone off DNet.
07-31-2013 | 11:53 AM
Straight QOL, homie
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,202
Likes: 1
From: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
Yes, absolutely to #1. I've done it several times. You just have to have adequate coverage on the day that you want to drop.
For #2, I think you can, but I've never tried it. My understanding is it works like a PD or APD. I think you only get paid for the day you drop though, and no soft credit, so the obvious thought would be to drop the highest hard-time day.
For #2, I think you can, but I've never tried it. My understanding is it works like a PD or APD. I think you only get paid for the day you drop though, and no soft credit, so the obvious thought would be to drop the highest hard-time day.
07-31-2013 | 11:59 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 906
Likes: 0
From: Just another RJ guy
You must be new to this thread. To answer your question, "yes." Our pilot group is on the leading edge of JV scope management. Basically, our contract requires management to use Delta pilots to fly our share of any new production which might be created via Joint Venture.
I think such broad based language is terrific because we draw a circle around everything (other than permitted exceptions) and state, "that's ours."
If you are interested there is an ALPA Council 44 meeting at the Holiday Inn, Virginia Ave., at 11am tomorrow where the guest speaker is among the foremost experts on JV's anywhere. LEC meetings are usually open to guests. You're welcome to pull up a chair, munch on a cookie and learn something.
If you are "Alaska Bound," have you read their scope language with regard to "Alaska Air Group." They failed to bind their holding company to anything other than their current and ordered 737 fleet. In other words, they drew their circle really small, just around a fleet specific operation. Our Circle is any flying by Delta, or for Delta.
I think such broad based language is terrific because we draw a circle around everything (other than permitted exceptions) and state, "that's ours."
If you are interested there is an ALPA Council 44 meeting at the Holiday Inn, Virginia Ave., at 11am tomorrow where the guest speaker is among the foremost experts on JV's anywhere. LEC meetings are usually open to guests. You're welcome to pull up a chair, munch on a cookie and learn something.
If you are "Alaska Bound," have you read their scope language with regard to "Alaska Air Group." They failed to bind their holding company to anything other than their current and ordered 737 fleet. In other words, they drew their circle really small, just around a fleet specific operation. Our Circle is any flying by Delta, or for Delta.
07-31-2013 | 12:09 PM
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
)Air France/KLM/Alitalia JV: We get half of the EASK. An EASK is a number which takes into account the passenger and cargo capacity of the operation by kilometers, meaning an A380 equals several 767's. If you were in Seattle you would see a Delta 767 going to Paris making it's share of EASK's. We typically have a one year measurement window to allow management to flex for seasonal demand patterns.
There has been a lot written here about the fact that Air France is not in balance. We grew our share when Alitalia joined the JV and expanded the window to three years. Due to a number of factors we've not yet caught up with our half. We're working on it.
Other JV's: We will not decrease flying year on year and our share is 75% of the Company's share of revenue flying.
LEC meetings are quarterly to the best of my knowledge.
07-31-2013 | 12:40 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,530
Likes: 0
07-31-2013 | 02:57 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 906
Likes: 0
From: Just another RJ guy
With regard to your examples: (really simplified version, so folks don't whack me with 1.5% windows )
Air France/KLM/Alitalia JV: We get half of the EASK. An EASK is a number which takes into account the passenger and cargo capacity of the operation by kilometers, meaning an A380 equals several 767's. If you were in Seattle you would see a Delta 767 going to Paris making it's share of EASK's. We typically have a one year measurement window to allow management to flex for seasonal demand patterns.
There has been a lot written here about the fact that Air France is not in balance. We grew our share when Alitalia joined the JV and expanded the window to three years. Due to a number of factors we've not yet caught up with our half. We're working on it.
Other JV's: We will not decrease flying year on year and our share is 75% of the Company's share of revenue flying.
LEC meetings are quarterly to the best of my knowledge.
)Air France/KLM/Alitalia JV: We get half of the EASK. An EASK is a number which takes into account the passenger and cargo capacity of the operation by kilometers, meaning an A380 equals several 767's. If you were in Seattle you would see a Delta 767 going to Paris making it's share of EASK's. We typically have a one year measurement window to allow management to flex for seasonal demand patterns.
There has been a lot written here about the fact that Air France is not in balance. We grew our share when Alitalia joined the JV and expanded the window to three years. Due to a number of factors we've not yet caught up with our half. We're working on it.
Other JV's: We will not decrease flying year on year and our share is 75% of the Company's share of revenue flying.
LEC meetings are quarterly to the best of my knowledge.
07-31-2013 | 06:51 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 5,583
Likes: 326
They are not improving. The company is just flat out ignoring our widebody jv scope. We are not sure what to do about it. The scope is good, but the company will be out of compliance and does not seem to care. Our union is now selling us that we are still doing our fair share of the flying. Our contractual share is more than our fair share. They don't seem to care either. I'm not really sure who is representing us on scope.
07-31-2013 | 07:33 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
From: DAL FO
They are not improving. The company is just flat out ignoring our widebody jv scope. We are not sure what to do about it. The scope is good, but the company will be out of compliance and does not seem to care. Our union is now selling us that we are still doing our fair share of the flying. Our contractual share is more than our fair share. They don't seem to care either. I'm not really sure who is representing us on scope.
1. The company is trending towards noncompliance
2. They can't be out of compliance until the end of the 3 yr measurement period
3. If they are out of compliance (which it looks like they might be) at that time, we will go from there
Everything else you posted is your opinion, and bordering on paranoia. The "fair share" buzzword is being overhyped and taken out of context. Nobody is selling you anything. This issue is receiving the proper amount of attention from your union. Check with your rep if you don't believe me.
07-31-2013 | 08:00 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
This is mostly incorrect. You are stating this as fact, when it is your opinion.
1. The company is trending towards noncompliance
2. They can't be out of compliance until the end of the 3 yr measurement period
3. If they are out of compliance (which it looks like they might be) at that time, we will go from there
1. The company is trending towards noncompliance
2. They can't be out of compliance until the end of the 3 yr measurement period
3. If they are out of compliance (which it looks like they might be) at that time, we will go from there
There-in lies the problem (bolded part).
Are we going to effectively "sell" scope (jobs) in exchange for some type of monetary/contractual gain as compensation for the violation, or are we going to try and enforce our scope as it is written and tell the company to comply....
Seems from history that some sort of relief for the company is the likely case.
07-31-2013 | 10:02 PM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
This is mostly incorrect. You are stating this as fact, when it is your opinion.
1. The company is trending towards noncompliance
2. They can't be out of compliance until the end of the 3 yr measurement period
3. If they are out of compliance (which it looks like they might be) at that time, we will go from there
Everything else you posted is your opinion, and bordering on paranoia. The "fair share" buzzword is being overhyped and taken out of context. Nobody is selling you anything. This issue is receiving the proper amount of attention from your union. Check with your rep if you don't believe me.
1. The company is trending towards noncompliance
2. They can't be out of compliance until the end of the 3 yr measurement period
3. If they are out of compliance (which it looks like they might be) at that time, we will go from there
Everything else you posted is your opinion, and bordering on paranoia. The "fair share" buzzword is being overhyped and taken out of context. Nobody is selling you anything. This issue is receiving the proper amount of attention from your union. Check with your rep if you don't believe me.
Respectfully, I disagree with you.
Paranoia would maybe be correct if Republic did not receive (scope noncompliance) language in section 1 of c2012 after we were told for 2-3 years that they were in compliance and we just couldn't read.
The proof will be in the pudding. What the union does when we are at the end of the measurement window will be the determiner of whether anyone is justifiably distrustful or pessimistic, or whether they were correct on their assessment of past practice being a predictor of future actions.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
