Fooled right into the best contract in the industry! If it's so simply and other unions are so superior why are the all behind us?

That's a cool graph. Really.

Now lets see the one about required regional pilots had DL re-engined the world's largest 50 seater fleet, and another chart showing that cost, even if they could staff them, which they couldn't. :rolleyes:

Short call buckets are different from reserve trip assigment buckets though. By the time you get into a higher bucket in one, you are usually at the bottom of the other. By the time you get in the higher bucket of the other, you are at the bottom of one of the other two again because everyone else caught up.

The RAW values are too got danged high, and the split/parallel bucket system needs to be modified to treat all assignments as assignments so you're not always "number one for something".

This is true, and was a major part of the drive consolidation. The miserable failure of the B-School manager crowd presiding over the last 15 years was the radical over ordering of the RJ bubble. There was a niche for those planes, but it was no where near the order book for them. But if one airline dumped a bunch on another to "hub raid" then the others felt compelled to do the same. Clinton also didn't help when he let unlimited RJ's into LGA not counting as a slot. That was one of the dumbest moves in aviation.

Any legacy hub, even without a single city pair of overlap with another, still competes massively against the existing others. Most hubs are much more connections than O&D. Connections don't matter where a hubs is other than basic traffic flow (you won't usually go SEA-JFK-PHX for example). Consolidation has helped implode the already fragile and unsustainable economics of the great RJ binge.

While there is less competition from a qualtity of networks perspective, whats left is much better run and much, much more sustainable. Flying the world 50 seats at a time was insanity even at its $15/bbl oil peak. It would be absolute disaster now. Which is one of many reasons there was no way on earth DL was going to chain their necks to a long term 50 seater RJ deal, even if there were the pilots to do it, which there aren't.

Polo shirt? Don't collar block me bro.

White t shirt, black socks, I.D. for the discount.

Chix dig it.

Now where did you come up with that ridiculous question?:confused:

Delta was never going to "reengine" the 50 seaters. DCI was going to shrink with or without C2012 (just not as much without it), as Delta had a path to get to 225 50 seat RJ's. Not quite as quick, but they had a path.

So making a graph about required regional pilots or the costs for a plan that didn't exist isn't really necessary, is it.

Which one? I see several. Academy ring and flip phone? :)

The truth comes out...two years later.

Now, if you will be honest and admit the 717s were coming with or without C12, we'll be getting somewhere.

You forgot aviator style Ray-Bans hanging from polo shirt button hole.

Of course its not. But that was part of the reasoning for the scope section WRT DCI in the first place. To truly grow the large RJ fleet would have required a massive mainline pump and dump and even then would have required immediate parking of 70 seaters. That was not going to happen.

Like you said though, 50's were on the way out, so the limits on them were a zero cost item if ever there was one. There was also going to be some significant degree of a shift from DCI to mainline, though its argueable if it would have been as much as we've seen from the 717's, even assuming they weren't coming any other way, which I think is something few if any still believe. They were just a flat out fantastic deal, and its very reasonable to assume they (or something else) were coming anyway.

Where they would have gotten the pump and dump planes, and how they would have added then dumped them (talk about a training bubble!) just to get 90's to replace 70's is a whole nother (pretty funny) scenario to try and envision.

But back to the exact topic of the 50's, we were told the company was, easilly, going to re-up their committments including re-enginging and some costly checks on those obsolete pigs if we didn't sign that one deal that one time. I think its been proven clearly false, that's all I'm saying. That doesn't mean C2012 was completely bad and it certainly doesn't mean C2012 didn't have some gains, or wasn't a net gain. And its not an indictment against anyone that voted for C2012 in the aggregate. But the rewards of the (RJ) scope portion were happening anyway, and the potential downsides of not acting soon were vaporware threats.

If there was a loose end we tied up in RJ scope, it was fixing the propulsion system loophole. That may or may not have ever played out, but it was nice to fix nonetheless.