It's having to match the Airbus, not the 88. The 88 checklist was like straight Airbus then they realized using it would result in an incident or excursion, so they added stuff necessary to prevent incidents and excursions. So now the 88 checklist looks like it was designed by a Frenchman appeasing people who live in Long Beach.

 

No, we are much closer on the "want list" than I think either of us want to admit. We absolutely should want things like that (and have said as much over and over again).

I want to bargain for increases in the pilot's bank accounts, not things that merely reduce the revenue generating capacity of the airline. Cut it with the "cost neutral" contract BS. It is NOT cost neutral to us, it merely took the DAL money pie and cut another slice smaller so we could have a bigger slice. The pie size didn't change... The pie is getting bigger and bigger each year, and I completely agree that we need to make sure that our slice keeps growing with the increase in pie size. My question is how do we force the Company's hand to give it? Where is the leverage? How useful is the NMB for us?

I'm up 31% yoy over what would have happened absent C2012. Enough? No! is 19.7% in rates plus tons of other increases a much better starting point for C2015 openers in 13.3 months? Yes!

(On the 88, in 2013 my per day avg. was 6:28 due to C2012 improvements, 2012 Jan.-Jun. was 5:38)

I forsee it will take us at least 12 months this time around, from my perspective RA doesn't have a "need for speed" that he is willing to pay for this time. I imagine it will be at least until UAL catches up to us and AMR is due for their reset is when he will allow a deal to finish, just to make sure that the competition's costs will rise to a similar degree much like this last round which forced UAL to come way up on their offer and AMR to get a much "less horrible" deal because we made a 12-30% jump ahead of their already lagging agreements.

T wants rates and LBP, you want rigs and pay, PD and FTB want every Delta painted aircraft to have Delta pilots. We won't get all of everything, so how do we split up the bigger chunk of pie?

I want 30% increase on day one next time... The bigger question is how long will I wait for "day one" to occur and could I get the same result with something that looks less sexy but achieves the same result?

To be fair, I got a 31% increase in the first year under C2012 without changing aircraft or category seniority, do that again to me please! Which at 4/8/3/3* would mean a bunch of those little pieces of sneaky money you mention above.. Throw me in that briar patch.

*Not saying 4/8/3/3 is my number, but I'll take 30% immediate improvements even if they don't appear big on the surface

 

Actually I'd like to see us be the only US airline to actually compete in MCO-EU. Its a mssive market, with more heavy jumbos there at any given time than we have flying all over the world total (well, almost) and I think we can compete. Of course, you have to get the plane there and back, and ATL-MCO is a market that's perhaps better served by the occasional heavy rather than spamming it with hourly frequency in a leisure market that doesn't reward that much frequency in the slightest. So the occasional 777 to MCO actually wouldn't be a bad idea.

That phrase is a catch all for bad revenue management because of how the original 777 debacle went down and DL ended up with only 8 or so and struggled to find out where to put them. DL made a lot of money doing L-1011's to MCO once because larger planes are generally cheaper seats than smaller planes, yet some high volume low yield markets have gravitated to smaller planes for no good reason other than "you go to war with the army you have" but as we get more we could see limited examples of that in ways that could maximise revenues and lower unit costs.

 

Meh. Woundn't have killed them to try and find some turbulence.

 

I cringe when I hear "we hear you loud and clear and pay is number one!"

That's like a mouse saying "a piece of cheese is number one! Oh look, a piece of cheese over there!"

Yes that's an over simplification, but scope is always number one because it is that everything else applies to. Anyone that puts pay or retirement or anything else ahead of scope is setting themselves up to lose both.

 

Can you produce any source for this? I read everything they put out. I went to the show. ALV 15 was a demand by the company to allow them to cover high time trips easier. International was used as a example because in some international categories there were trips that could not be covered by any reserves. It also applies to 4 and 5 day domestic trips. Never did I hear it was a international only item. We could certainly have said no. The company could then have responded by changing trip construction and basing in ways the pilot group might not have liked.
Instead we choose to trade ALV15 for pay and manning improvements in other areas. It now appears we got the better end of the deal and pilot actions in how they are bidding show that the new reserve system is preferred to what we had. Items we got in trade include reserves full at a lower value, known absences counting toward full and a automatic increase in required manning in any category where reserve utilization exceeds 60 hours. There also was a reserve only pay increase.

 

Wow, I was checking out the NYC schedules. They are going to OGG and HNL!!! Sweet!

TEN

 

I wonder what Suze Orman would say?

TEN

 

Flying the 777 to MCO also makes sense if the AC arrives in ATL in the morning and is going to sit for 8 hours before going out again on a international flight. It is essentially a free airframe at that point and can reduce pilot training costs.

 

The company has a issue with Trip awards referencing 100 in 672. If you were denied any awards based on that I would double check to make sure you were in fact illegal. If not you have some cash coming.