Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Closed Thread Subscribe

Page 17417 of 20173

17417

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

12-15-2014, 05:26 PM

#174161

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: 747-400 Captain

Posts: 12,487

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiznit

Ever since the JV agreement was signed as a six party agreement, they were supposed to end up with a 50/50 split of EASK's.

First, when was this JV ever a six party agreement? Second, before the addition of Alitalia, we were supposed to be at 51.5% and the euros were supposed to be at 48.5%. if memory serves, I don't believe we Delta pilots EVER got more than about 50.5%...and that was for a very short time.

From 51.5% to our approx 47% today represents an awful lot of actual jobs lost, and jobs we never got.

Carl

12-15-2014, 05:27 PM

#174162

sailingfun

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Feb 2008

Posts: 19,308

Quote:

Originally Posted by georgetg

And here is your shortfall:

Cheers
George

George, what you have just posted matches up almost exactly with what I posted a few days ago that you said was all wrong. I stated we were above 47%. The above confirms it and does not account for the AF strike which adds about a half percent.

12-15-2014, 05:41 PM

#174163

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: 747-400 Captain

Posts: 12,487

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiznit

DAL was operating roughly 54-46% of the EASK's but had planned to growth to be "in the window" to comply.

DAL never operated 54% of the EASK's. Never. I think you meant to say DAL operated 46%-54% of the EASK's.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiznit

Then the European meltdown happened and the transatlantic flying started to become unprofitable. DAL drew down flying to match capacity with demand.... AF and KL did not.

And that's where Delta first showed its contempt for our scope. They had no contractual right to draw down flying to match capacity with demand. Route profitability was not a reason in our scope that allowed them to be in non-compliance. Not even our negotiators would have agreed to a profitability provision. Yet here we are excusing it as a business decision.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiznit

AF was viewed as a jobs creator for the French economy and the govt didn't want them to shrink and layoff more workers into the economy. UNSAT, IMHO... Business is business. Similar story with KL, but they did drawdown a little bit more than AF, but still not enough to match the DAL drawdown. RA doesn't want to lose money unless it's a strategic long term play.... Keeping up those North Atlantic numbers didn't fit any strategic plan.

Again, it wasn't supposed to matter what RA wants or doesn't want. That's why we have a contract instead of an FOM like at some non-union outfit.

Oh wait...

Carl

12-15-2014, 05:43 PM

#174164

georgetg

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jul 2006

Position: Boeing Hearing and Ergonomics Lab Rat, Night Shift

Posts: 1,724

Quote:

Originally Posted by sailingfun

First off the 47.1% snapshot was in February 2013, it is now December 2014 nearly 22 months later...

Take a look at the entire 36-month look-back period.

You'll see that the initial 36 months from April 2011 to March 2014 contain considerable portions above the lower compliance band.

When we measure the 36-months look-back at the end of March 2015, the start point will shift right to April 2012, and even the highest point of the 36-month rolling average will then fall below the 48.5% lower band...

I'm sure you understand this...

Cheers
George

12-15-2014, 05:48 PM

#174165

Cogf16

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: May 2008

Position: VEOP Retired! 7ER A was last position

Posts: 978

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon

How many 757s are there now? When will the fleet stabilize? Where do the NBA charter planes that I've heard so much about fit in?

I just heard from a reliable company pilot that the 757 fleet will be 100 +/- a few. Kinda looking for some "newer" used ones as well to replace some of our oldest ones. Keeping ER's longer as well.

12-15-2014, 06:09 PM

#174166

Scoop

Super Moderator

Joined APC: Dec 2007

Position: DAL 330

Posts: 6,880

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cogf16

I just heard from a reliable company pilot that the 757 fleet will be 100 +/- a few. Kinda looking for some "newer" used ones as well to replace some of our oldest ones. Keeping ER's longer as well.

You are correct. I don't know what the confusion on this issue is. On September 30 S.D. and his team rolled into LAX for the FLT OPS roadshow. This exact question was asked and the answer was 90 DAL owned 757s and 10 leased back from the NBA.

Now everything is obviously subject to change but I have heard about 15 different numbers since then, but if you cant trust the FLT OPs team with the Network guy and the Fleet guy both saying 90 + 10, then all other numbers are also meaningless.

Scoop

12-15-2014, 06:17 PM

#174167

RockyBoy

Doesn't Get Weekends Off

Joined APC: Jun 2007

Posts: 2,598

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cogf16

I just heard from a reliable company pilot that the 757 fleet will be 100 +/- a few. Kinda looking for some "newer" used ones as well to replace some of our oldest ones. Keeping ER's longer as well.

How many do we have right now? Anyone know that answer?

12-15-2014, 06:28 PM

#174168

Justdoinmyjob

Looking for a laugh

Joined APC: Feb 2008

Posts: 4,099

Quote:

Originally Posted by RockyBoy

How many do we have right now? Anyone know that answer?

According to the ship attributes page, 141 757s.

12-15-2014, 06:36 PM

#174169

Carl Spackler

Back on TDY

Joined APC: Apr 2008

Position: 747-400 Captain

Posts: 12,487

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiznit

So now DAL EASK's fall as a survival measure, not as a "screw those Delta Pilots" move.

Unbelievable. A survival measure? We were and are making billions. Keeping those flights (and their word in the contract they signed with us) would have made those flights unprofitable most likely, but would have had no bearing on the survival of Delta. It might not have been "screw those Delta pilots", but it definitely was: "I'm not about to let that contract diminish our profit and my bonus." And with DALPA It was: If Richard's happy...we're happy."

Carl

12-15-2014, 07:18 PM

#174170

Justdoinmyjob

Looking for a laugh

Joined APC: Feb 2008

Posts: 4,099

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

How long do you think Delta would keep pilots on the payroll flying unprofitable flights just to meet a manning formula? How long did it take all the unprofitable flights Delta flew around under the "Carpet Bagger" to contribute to the bankruptcy?