![]() |
|
Originally Posted by Denny Crane
(Post 1674430)
I might add an hour plus to that 13 hours. SEA-HKG is blocked at 14:14. 4 day trip total 27:13.
Denny Good point. I originally said 13-14, but to be safe dumped the 14 and added "comfortably." (And block is more than flight time) |
Originally Posted by Alan Shore
(Post 1673922)
But don't forget the $400M per year more in pilot costs that this way costs them.
It's good to know that with our help, all other employees at Delta are back to their pre-bankruptcy wages. Carl |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1673835)
The total number of allowed 76 seat jets was reduced in contract 2012.
Originally Posted by Alan Shore
(Post 1673853)
Technically, yes, but not universally. As it was, we were frozen at 153, with no way to increase without trading in an equal number of 70-seaters AND increasing mainline airframes above a certain number. Now, Delta can add 76-seaters simply by buying 717's (which they arguably might have done anyway) without having to trade in 70-seaters.
Carl |
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1674476)
Don't forget those $400 million in increased pilot costs were more than offset by over $400 million in pilot concessions. That's why management refers to our contract as not only cost neutral, but allows them to invest in initiatives to benefit other employee groups at Delta.
It's good to know that with our help, all other employees at Delta are back to their pre-bankruptcy wages. Carl The $400 million is the NET (as in after all the pluses and minuses) increase in YOY costs that are now enriching the bank accounts of Delta Pilots. Let me repeat it for others, because you really don't get it: DAL reduced a couple hundred million in DCI expenses on one part of their ledger and that amount was then put into the pilot PWA. Cost neutral to the overall enterprise but significantly cost positive to the Delta pilots. |
I don't know what the big deal is with the 76 seaters, there doesn't seem to be any less than eighty people going anywhere. Eventually even the company will figure that one out. I sure would like to know what the load factor is for the 717.
|
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1674482)
Why do you continue to make a fool of yourself sailingfun? I know you and that old guard MEC admin thinks you can get away with such blatantly distorted posts because the issue is too complex, and people will just believe you. Alan's posts and the others should show you that tactic doesn't fly in the new world of social media. Yet you stubbornly persist. Why?
Carl |
Originally Posted by shiznit
(Post 1674527)
It is simply not correct Carl, and just because you keep saying it over and over again doesn't change that truth.
Originally Posted by shiznit
(Post 1674527)
The $400 million is the NET (as in after all the pluses and minuses) increase in YOY costs that are now enriching the bank accounts of Delta Pilots.
Originally Posted by shiznit
(Post 1674527)
Let me repeat it for others, because you really don't get it: DAL reduced a couple hundred million in DCI expenses on one part of their ledger and that amount was then put into the pilot PWA.
Originally Posted by shiznit
(Post 1674527)
Cost neutral to the overall enterprise but significantly cost positive to the Delta pilots.
Carl |
Originally Posted by Gomerglideslope
(Post 1674558)
Not sure why you hurl insults like that. I don't come around here much, but like it or not Sailing comes off as a good bit more intelligent than you do (no offense intended because the real Carl Spackler is a national treasure)...and as someone just pointed out, you continue to trot out discredited canards, I suppose to attract adherents to a view that is eroding more quickly every day...but I'm sure a successful DPA vote is imminent and will change all that...."Freeze Gopher"
Carl |
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1674482)
Why do you continue to make a fool of yourself sailingfun? I know you and that old guard MEC admin thinks you can get away with such blatantly distorted posts because the issue is too complex, and people will just believe you. Alan's posts and the others should show you that tactic doesn't fly in the new world of social media. Yet you stubbornly persist. Why?
Carl |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1674572)
The poster stated we increased the allowed number of 76 seaters. That was not the case and all I stated. In fact based on the newest fleet plan they could have the number of 76 seaters they seem content with under the old or new contract.
You're only reemphasizing my continued assertion that you are just awful at analysis. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:11 AM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands