I dug down to the bottom of this. Bottom line is the decision is made above the Flight Operations management that we deal with. Our management executes the flying plan they are given.

Our management understands even less about the small jet cost structure than your average new hire who came from one of these carriers.

It isn't that Delta Flight Operations management is trying to obsfucate, they just don't know because it is not in their chain of command to know. It would be akin to asking a F15 driver how the reactor machinery on an aircraft carrier works ... you will probably get an answer & the answer will be incorrect.

Our airplanes are serviced by the exact same gate agents and rampers as DCI jets are. There is no difference in these costs. Further, we could staff Delta with DCI flight attendants if Delta wanted to do so. They have no union and no scope.

Jackson-ville. If it were Jackson there would be a plaintiff attorney feeding frenzy. There is not much chum since BP decided to try to hang on to solvency.

Tuesday, September 02, 2014 11:52 a.m. EDT
By Daniel Wallis

(Reuters) - An argument over leg room and reclining seats forced a Florida-bound flight from New York to divert to a different airport late on Monday, the third such incident of a midair disruption caused by passengers in about a week.

Delta Air Lines said that "out of an abundance of caution" the captain of Flight 2370 from New York La Guardia to West Palm Beach chose to land instead at the closest airport, Jacksonville, where local law enforcement removed one passenger.

It did not elaborate on the "disruption," but a witness told Jacksonville TV station WJXT TV-4 that an argument broke out during the flight between one woman who wanted to recline her seat and another in the row behind who wanted to sleep while resting on her tray table.

The witness said one of the women became loud and abusive when a flight attendant was called.

The aircraft later flew on to West Palm Beach where it landed shortly after 11 p.m., a couple of hours late. Delta representatives did not immediately return a call for comment.

The latest incident came just five days after an American Airlines flight to Paris from Miami was diverted to Boston following an argument between passengers over a reclining seat.

In that case, a 60-year-old Frenchman was subdued by plainclothes U.S. air marshals and charged in federal court with interfering with flight crew members, prosecutors said.

Just days before that, a United Airlines flight from Newark, New Jersey, to Denver on Aug. 24 had to be diverted to Chicago due to an argument between passengers over a device that stops the seat in front from reclining.

The airline said one of those involved was using a Knee Defender, a small wedge-like gadget that clips to a tray table and forces the seat in front to stay upright. Many carriers, including United, ban the use of the device.

-0-0-

Bucking Bar,

I don't know when you were hired, however in my years here I know that this will never happen and the FA's DO have a pseudo union in ALPA. Just look the history of how they end up getting whatever we negotiate to some extent. Profit sharing was one.

Agreed. The best days of DCI were when CMR ran a huge out and back hub in CVG and SKYW did the same in SLC. Those were two operational powerhouses that ran very tight ships with only a few exceptions (very rare severe icing and IT meltdowns, etc). ASA didn't run nearly as good an operation at the time, but eventually came around. By the time they did though, the "spread it all around going spastic trying to mitigate a strike" strategy had already been implemented and the entire DCI operation was a downhill train wreck.

While I agree DL has some very smart managers, there are also a lot who faithfully stick to faulty B-school textbook paradigms and either cannot or will not change regardless of reality or result. Even if they are successful in some rediculous hour reduction, unless its back to the 250-300 hour range, which it won't be, it will have little to no effect. The lowest number I've heard anywhere in any context is 800 and that's only if its coupled with an insanely expensive million dollar plane glass ninja fantasy flight line training program. Shaving off a few hundred hours (while possibly increasing the training costs) will do nothing whatsoever to recruit and train future pilots.


Agreed. However the points you brought up WRT the political dynamics make almost any conceivable attempt at a staple a non starter. Even if a majority agreed to it, there would be an automatic sizeable minority that would use it as a vehicle to sue for arbitration. Just like last time, they would feign righteousness about "the process", especially if they had the advantage of taking the runway and reaching V1; they'd have absolutely nothing to lose and the rediculous McCaskill-Bond in their corner in an era of "relative rules" arbitrators.

Sure, we would make a compelling case about how relative should only be in tiered categories, and theirs would be at the bottom, but are you really willing to risk your career that we would come out the other side of that without any current pilots losing a single number? That's why I don't think its possible that way. Bring the planes to mainline and hire to the bottom of our list. We can give them pref interviews or even a flow through, but I don't see how we could mitigate the risks of a massive land grab by lots of "senior" pilots with nothing to lose once the decision to put them on our list has been made.

United Airlines plans to retire its 50-seat regional jets by next year, instead deploying larger Embraer regional jets that can seat 76 passengers. The Trefis Team writes that "fleet restructuring focused on replacing older, less fuel-efficient airplanes with new, more fuel-efficient airplanes will add growth to United's results in the coming years." Forbes (8/29)

Imagine that...an airline managed to get rid of 50 seaters without its union telling the pilots some story...

I keep hearing that too, but I can't seem to find the napkin with the math on it to show how it can be the case.

BTW, what do you think the potential 787 on this RFP means?

We already have slots coming in 2020 (supposedly) and a December RFP announcement (assuming it won't be delayed and delayed and delayed like so many other things…despite "speed wins" :confused: ) so what happens if the 787 loses? Do we cancel existing orders? If it wins, do we take orders we were going to take anyway, and if so could they realistically even be on property prior to 2020 anyway? Or do you think they are potential "growth" 787's and we will still take the 2020 ones anyway?

Imagine the laughing stock DL would be if they had green lighted the massive re-engine and heavy check committment to all those insanely expensive 50 seater block hours they could never staff anyway. :cool: Good thing the pilots saved their bacon by allowing them to get 717's.

Just heard via the grapevine that the "merger committee" has been holding "emergency" meetings!

I wonder what's up?!?!?!

Anyone else?

Agreed, but like the NWA Asian FA base, they could split it off. We should not be closed minded when it comes to unity. All ALPA need concern itself with is pilots.

Haven't heard that, but I'd hope we have very fleshed out stratedgies for at least 4 potential scenarios, and well thought out gameplans for a few others. There are at least 4 that should never take us by surprise and we should be ready to face in an instant.