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

Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Search

Notices

Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-30-2013 | 07:54 PM
  #138351  
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 johnso29
But fleet is defined as aircraft in ervice. So a fleet CAN'T be established without said planes in service.
28. “Fleet” means aircraft in service, undergoing maintenance, and operational spares.

I don't find the word "established" in C2012 or PWA2008. But fleet is added to C2012 definitions as it didn't exist before.
Old 08-30-2013 | 07:59 PM
  #138352  
MrBojangles's Avatar
Line Holder
10 Years
 
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 643
Likes: 52
Default

Originally Posted by johnso29
Sweet. Then you don't believe all reserves will be flying ALV+15 all summer because it hasn't happened.
maybe not all, but I sure have-I'm sure the senior dudes have it better
Old 08-30-2013 | 08:28 PM
  #138353  
Bucking Bar's Avatar
Can't abide NAI
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Default

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
I'd like you and I to not stray off our subject Bar. Merger policy (or any wording removed) has nothing to do with ALPA national signing off on the establishment of an alter ego airline.

Carl
Carl,

It took some research.

In 1998 ALPA gutted and bifurcated its Merger and Alter-ego policy.

The policy prior to these changes reflected the lessons of the Texas Air fiasco and formally declared that alter egos in any form to be the greatest threat to ALPA and they were not to be tolerated under any circumstances. At that time the definition of an alter ego was "When management forms or acquires another company for the purpose of operating an airline, it shall be deemed an alter ego..." ALPA's policy sought to prevent the formation of alter egos. If formed or acquired, ALPA's weapon of choice was the forced merger of the seniority lists. Thus the reason why the merger and alter ego policies were one in the same.

In 1998 ALPA bifurcated the Merger and Alter-ego policy and, worse, gutted the key definitions in the merger policy making it totally discretionary. ALPA said the primary motive was the Duke-Spellacy case and they didn't want to get pinned down in court again.

The Delta MEC was the instigator of the change and the timing, just months prior to Delta's purchase of ASA, suggests the Delta MEC had advanced knowledge of management's intentions concerning both ASA and Comair.

In effect, you could say ALPA's 1998 decision sowed the seeds of their own decline and the rise of the start-up rival unions. It wasn't just a bad decision, but it was the product of a horribly flawed strategic analysis where objective facts didn't matter.

As stated earlier, the disunity of the DPA is nothing new. It's genesis was right here, it resonates with the logic of the Delta MEC and Admin 15 years ago.

Last edited by Bucking Bar; 08-30-2013 at 08:52 PM.
Old 08-30-2013 | 08:39 PM
  #138354  
Bucking Bar's Avatar
Can't abide NAI
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Default

Originally Posted by Wasatch Phantom
People castigate Tim Caplinger yet Lee Moak is given a free pass for endorsing the Pinnacle/DAL management backroom deal. To me that's a double standard, something I abhor.

Bar preaches unity, yet we don't see that practiced by ALPA national...
Phantom,

You are correct. President Moak has not been given a completely "free pass." Behind the scenes he has taken a little heat. Most view his actions in balance and aren't going to act on an issue which mostly screws the express pilots.

If we end up with the DPA we have no chance to fix it. By structure and design the DPA does not want to undo the harm of disunity. The DPA represents the old radicals that screwed the thing up to being with.

ALPA has the structure in place that facilitates restoration.
Old 08-30-2013 | 09:06 PM
  #138355  
Bucking Bar's Avatar
Can't abide NAI
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Default

DPA supporters ... if you call for a vote, where do you draw the line on the "craft and class" that you intend to represent?
a. Delta seniority list pilots
b. Pilots within the Delta MEC at merger who are active
c. All pilots who perform Delta Company flying
Old 08-31-2013 | 01:49 AM
  #138356  
Moderator
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
Default

Originally Posted by forgot to bid
28. “Fleet” means aircraft in service, undergoing maintenance, and operational spares.

I don't find the word "established" in C2012 or PWA2008. But fleet is added to C2012 definitions as it didn't exist before.
Yes. Notice how it says "AND" operational spares? Not "OR" operational spares? Therefore, fleet is not a fleet until all 3 of those things are met.
Old 08-31-2013 | 03:40 AM
  #138357  
Bucking Bar's Avatar
Can't abide NAI
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Default

Originally Posted by forgot to bid
I'm sure that would be the case. But if this is seat related then I bet it's our problem.
Didn't these things come with seats in them ? I think they even had a blue cover.

Well? Spray some cleaner on them, stick those in and let's go.

Seats have been a hot button issue since some Asian carriers were found to be non compliant. Sequestration, Miami, an out of production design, the work outsourced and perhaps under the direction of a competitive rival who was going to pay us to take them off theirs hands and who now realizes these things might be a small part of a bigger play at Delta who is spending billions on new jets at its new wholly owned subsidiary .... What could go wrong?

As new $38,930,000.00 regional jets start to pile up ... crap, probably time for me to stop posting on web boards.
TORONTO, ONTARIO--(Marketwire - Dec 6, 2012) - Bombardier Aerospace announced today that Delta Air Lines, Inc. of Atlanta, Georgia has placed a firm order for 40 CRJ900 NextGen regional jets and has taken options on an additional 30 CRJ900 NextGen aircraft.
Based on the list price of the CRJ900 NextGen aircraft, the firm order is valued at approximately $1.85 billion US, and could reach approximately $3.29 billion US if the 30 options are converted to firm orders.
The new CRJ900 NextGen regional jets will be configured with 76 seats in a two-class cabin and will be operated by Delta Connection carriers to be determined by Delta Air Lines.
Ya know, we could hire Delta pilots for these airplanes....

Last edited by Bucking Bar; 08-31-2013 at 03:56 AM.
Old 08-31-2013 | 04:05 AM
  #138358  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 922
Likes: 0
From: Decoupled
Default

Originally Posted by Roadkill
Sched question... I had a trip on 30 Sep. It still shows up on my schedule, but when I click on it it now reads "not operating, replaced by 35xx".
The new trip # doesn't exist in the Sep bidpack, the Oct bidpack isn't out, and there is no place I can find what this new trip is.

Do I have to accept it (changed carryout trip with 3 days of trip in carryout month)? Where can I find what it is, and how bad a boofing this is?
Thanks!
This happened to me as well. Just take the new rotation number and type it into the rotation tab. A trip will show up. At this point, it won't have your name on it. It will be a crappy trip that has none of the parameter's you used when you bid.

In my case, it increased my trip from a three day to a four day. I would drop it. But, there isn't anything in open time. I can't get a white slip, guys senior to me lap those up no matter how crappy the trip.

I thought we had changed this in the last contract, but after consulting with a DALPA professional, it seems we didn't. My bad. I would avoid carry over trips, but you can't avoid them entirely.

I didn't bid reserve, but it looks like that's really what I got.
Old 08-31-2013 | 04:06 AM
  #138359  
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 johnso29
Yes. Notice how it says "AND" operational spares? Not "OR" operational spares? Therefore, fleet is not a fleet until all 3 of those things are met.
So if the entire fleet is flying and not one is in maintenance or not one can be an operational spare then it's not a fleet?

My bet, and I'm no Newk, is that the word fleet was added to prevent the 717s from being acquired and put into storage but that acquisition being enough to allow the CRJ-900s to be ordered and flown on revenue service without the 717s. The word maintenance was in there because that would allow ## CR9s to enter into service even if the required number of 717s had not yet hit the line because they were being refurbished in maintenance.

That's my guess. But let's say it is a violation, 717s in maintenance and not yet flying therefore means no CR9s can be flying but let's say they do anyways, what are we going to do about it? I mean what do we get for that when we find out the 717s are good to go come Nov 1 and in the meantime the company is flying 160 super premium jumbo 76-seater RJs?

What's your definition of constructive engagement?

Last edited by forgot to bid; 08-31-2013 at 04:20 AM.
Old 08-31-2013 | 04:33 AM
  #138360  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,530
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by forgot to bid
So if the entire fleet is flying and not one is in maintenance or not one can be an operational spare then it's not a fleet?

My bet, and I'm no Newk, is that the word fleet was added to prevent the 717s from being acquired and put into storage but that acquisition being enough to allow the CRJ-900s to be ordered and flown on revenue service without the 717s. The word maintenance was in there because that would allow ## CR9s to enter into service even if the required number of 717s had not yet hit the line because they were being refurbished in maintenance.

That's my guess. But let's say it is a violation, 717s in maintenance and not yet flying therefore means no CR9s can be flying but let's say they do anyways, what are we going to do about it? I mean what do we get for that when we find out the 717s are good to go come Nov 1 and in the meantime the company is flying 160 super premium jumbo 76-seater RJs?

What's your definition of constructive engagement?
Bingo. Surely there is a defined penalty in the PWA should a contract violation occur. I mean, that's what lawyers do, create water tight language to include significant enough penalties to make sure one side doesn't take advantage of the other.
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



Your Privacy Choices