Airline Pilot Central Forums - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)

- - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/36912-any-latest-greatest-about-delta.html)

Buzz,

Agreed. The Act failed to address costs, even the low hanging fruit:
- Clearly stated pricing up front
- 50 State reprocity for healthcare professionals
- Remove the exemptions to Anti Trust (anti-competitive) rules that govern every other business
- Address the issue of these "non-profit" hospitals which are not "non profit" at all

Quote:

Originally Posted by boog123 (Post 1490518)

I can not for the life of me understand how someone junior (so you say) would look at any of these agreements and say it's a win. We are losing more flying, that means less pilots. Just because there was some sort of perceived "no floor" doesn't mean that signing off on 85% is a "win". Gross.

Look at the feet. When was the last time we ended up with more pilots in December than we started with in January. All while "winning" all these scope agreements.

Boog,

Your frustration is understandable. We will however have more pilots in December 2014 than January 2014.

What little bit I understand about this LOA does not lend itself to internet sound bytes. I think we are all going to have to read the comm article that comes out and evaluate how this works in different markets.

Quote:

Originally Posted by boog123 (Post 1490518)

85% of current Asia PAC flying is LESS then 316 slots at NRT? Slots that are simply drawn down by cancelling a code share that equates to roughly 5000 passengers per year? 182,750 block hours is LESS then 116,000 block hours? You do fuzzy math.

We've been merged now for almost 5 years. Did you expect that a transaction that was designed to take the best of two airlines would result in immediate growth? When has that ever occurred? UAL is going through the exact same thing. So is SWA. AA/Us Air will as well. Stop trying to blame it on ALPA.

The last contract set us up for growth. And it's happening. Hiring has begun. A WB/NB order had been placed. B717s & B737s are being delivered. Those are positive items. The good pieces are falling into place. :)

On reserve, schedule is marked as "FULL". Can I still pick up a greenslip?

This is 4th month this summer I've flown over guarantee (without greenslips). Six years on reserve I've never gone over guarantee once. Thank you C2012 and AVL + 15 :(

Check your inbox, the spin piece is out.

Now, THIS is my idea of America's Cup:

http://us-mg6.mail.yahoo.com/ya/down...Inbox&inline=1

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1490121)

What did that language guarantee? What did it protect? I haven't seen any language that guarantees anything.

By your non-response to your initial question of leverage, I take it we've at least cleared that up. Leverage didn't apply to us because it was management asking for something...not us.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1490121)

You totally avoided that question in your response. Forget about what supposedly has been done by the MEC, and these boards are nothing but a discussion anyway, we don't affect policy no matter how much you wish otherwise. Educate me on what it is that you believe protected us and could have FORCED management to keep those slots in use..... and more importantly, the follow on that would have then guaranteed that they would have been FORCED to maintain all those slots in NRT. Frankly, I don't think you can do that because the way I understand it, that language does not exist. But I'll listen.

OK, here goes. I didn't say our language guaranteed anything. I said our language protected us. It protected us by not allowing the company to slowly dismantle NRT flying and replace it with code share. It did this by requiring the company to operate 316 slots per week out of NRT or code share immediately became illegal per our contract. It didn't require management to always operate 316 slots per week no matter what. It tied management's ability to code share to the 316 slot requirement. It was smart because we all know requiring our company to operate X amount of flying even if it is unprofitable is a recipe for disaster. It hurts us as employees as much as it hurts the company. The key was tying code share to the slots. It protected our jobs from slowly being code shared away. Again, not guarantee...protection. Moot point however because that's gone now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1490121)

And one last thing... without "traffic" there are no passengers.. and without them, we have no jobs. We are a DISTANT third in terms of Asian code share partners, and it is a big disadvantage for us. Why can'[t we do that flying organically? I do not know, but apparently we cannot. I think this is the first manifestation of that reason.....

I reject the entire premise of this management-speak about how important code share is. There is no evidence whatsoever that code share has helped Delta pilots one bit. The empirical data I see is Delta pilots losing flying to code share partners while they gain. That's the net/net I see. DALPA's spin notwithstanding, code shares have done nothing but help management. It helps them by spreading risk of having only one pilot group fly their brand. As unionized employees, I always thought we were supposed to be protected from that type of Darwinism by having exclusivity as to who flies our company brand. Southwest pilots have that. We used to have it. I want it back because therein lies our ultimate leverage and our ultimate strength as an employee group. As long as we allow this selling of our jobs for the latest JV, code share, RJ replacement stuff, we'll continue to have less and less strength. And as long as we all continue to parrot the latest managment buzzwords and experiments, we may as well not have a union.

I think we need a new acronym at Delta for our union. UINO (Union In Name Only).

Carl

Quote:

Originally Posted by scambo1 (Post 1490134)

T,
Just my opinion, but this LOA would probably have gone no differently if DPA was in charge. This was 100% in house DALPA. I will be interested to read the various dissenting opinions between the reps.

Another opinion I have, based on SDs last letter to the troops is that no matter how much each of us is bent to think like managers, or investment grade whatevers, SD and management looks at us like children and incapable of rational managerial thought...

It was an interesting and entertaining back and forth last night, but one thing all of us can probably agree on, we were almost all completely in the dark about the details and nuance of what this LOA involved (that didn't stop us) and we argued with each other based on the standard "battle lines."

Why was this LOA which, IMO, was negotiated over a period of time done in such secrecy? Why were we not educated on the nuance by our CBA? Why was there no MEMRAT?

Are we a bunch of idiots? Do our reps view us the same as SD views us? This LOA was the perfect set up for one of those Hitler videos.

As to the leverage question, if the company comes to us, we have leverage. The amount of that leverage is the question mark.

There are a couple of things I THINK are facts.
1. This doesn't have anything to do with 15 pax/day, that number will get much larger.
2. The end result of the LOA will require fewer DAL jets to do the same job.

Exactly right.

Carl

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnso29 (Post 1490287)

We were at 0% guaranteed on Asia-PAC flying, and now we are at 85% guaranteed. Definitely a win.

316 slots per week at NRT was in our contract. Now it's not.

85% is now in our contract per this LOA. Will it be there next year? Who knows. Thus it's no guarantee. Forcing our company to fly unprofitably above the 85% threshold is something our pilot group will never force management to do. You must know that.

Carl

140,000 and hopefully counting.

There are complaints on the ALPA forum about more enforcement of the TOS, and some seem to be saying that a wholesale shutdown is on its' way. No idea if any of it is true (the forum seems to be working fine), but if it is, this little oasis of underboob and (mostly) civil discussion might get run over.

On a very bad day, APC is ten times more pleasant than what the Hangar Talk has become. What felt like low points in the discourse, might be looked back upon fondly as "the good old days".

I hope this doesn't get turned into that, but if it does, and the L&G turns into a East-West style death match before it dies, I just want to say that I've enjoyed this thread with you guys very much. Who knew people would be more respectful of one another when anonymous?

Here is to hoping it stays a worthwhile place; let's not make uncle Ferd have to come in and fix this once again.

Sincerely,

Sink r8