Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Subscribe
16674  17174  17574  17624  17664  17670  17671  17672  17673  17674  17675  17676  17677  17678  17684  17724  17774  18174  18674 
Page 17674 of 20173
Go to
Quote: He threatened to out someone. That's a pretty clear violation of the TOS.

What you laid out was well thought out and presented in a coherent way. He basically said "we should trade profit sharing for $5,000/year." Then he said it over and over again. I'm all for civil discussion of different ideas but it was pretty clear he was here to stir the pot.

He hadn't posted until today and then went full throttle. He admitted to having other screen names which, presumably, had already been banned. He's a troll.
He is a DAL pilot. He has a right to his viewpoints. What are annuities paying these days? A $5000/yr annuity nets you what amount monthly in retirement $35, maybe, I'll pass on that.
Quote: Don't have the data to prove it, but I do have <10% battery remaining, and am at the shop with car, and no charg
Looks like October 2012 Mother Trend for you.
I'm taking the family out to SLC for a week to teach my son how to ski. Where's the good snow, hotels that shuttle and reasonable lift tickets...it's been awhile for me. I need a refresher.
Quote: He is a DAL pilot. He has a right to his viewpoints. What are annuities paying these days? A $5000/yr annuity nets you what amount monthly in retirement $35, maybe, I'll pass on that.
He doesn't have the right to out someone here, which was his parting action. According 80ktsClamp he violated the TOS several times before threatening to out another poster (which I saw before being deleted).

He posted something just believable enough to elicit response and went off on people when he got the (very predictable) response he wanted. Throw in the fact that he just started posting a few hours before he was tossed and that he admitted he had multiple user names and it adds up to troll. I'm not certain he's even a Delta pilot.
Quote: You may already know this, but I learned it the hard way a couple of weeks ago: a significant difference internationally is that you cannot "convert" your non-rev listing to a JS listing ("flow forward"). Once you're within 75 minutes of push, you're stuck with whatever listing you have (or don't have). For reasons that elude me, the system cannot take a non-rev listing and put you in the JS; and we're not allowed to make two listings (i.e., one non-rev & another JS "just in case"). You can still "flow back" from the JS if there are open seats, but if you're trying to sit with your wife, that may not work out as well....
Thanks for the heads up.
Quote: I'm taking the family out to SLC for a week to teach my son how to ski. Where's the good snow, hotels that shuttle and reasonable lift tickets...it's been awhile for me. I need a refresher.
Sundacne is going on right now in Park City, it ends on Superbowl Sunday. All hotels will be priced high until it ends. We came last year in early Jan. and stayed at Park City Marriott
1895 Sidewinder Drive Park City Utah 84060 for a Delta rate of $80. Give them a call. You can get a lift ticket at the PC mountain or Caynons for 15 or 20% off with Delta ID on the going rate.
We haven't got much snow this year but all the mountain is open and groomed.
[QUOTE=Jughead135;1812614]You may already know this, but I learned it the hard way a couple of weeks ago: a significant difference internationally is that you cannot "convert" your non-rev listing to a JS listing ("flow forward"). Once you're within 75 minutes of push, you're stuck with whatever listing you have (or don't have). For reasons that elude me, the system cannot take a non-rev listing and put you in the JS; and we're not allowed to make two listings (i.e., one non-rev & another JS "just in case"). You can still "flow back" from the JS if there are open seats, but if you're trying to sit with your wife, that may not work out as well....[/QUOTE]

We've been married long enough that she requests we be seated separately.
Quote: Out of base white slips ahead of reserves is not a bad thing. In fact it's elimination was a concession demanded by the company. They did not want to pay a line holder to fly a trip they could have a reserve fly for free. The old system still allowed any in base reserve to move ahead of a out of base white slip if they desired a specific trip or just to fly via a yellow slip. I would have no problem with changing back to the pre bankruptcy system. Sadly such a change will be costed against us in the next contract even though it was ripped from us in chapter 11.
Hey sailing,

To be perfectly honest, I've re-read your OOBWS stuff a couple of times, and I'm confused. You're saying OOBWS ahead of Reserves is a good thing (the OP wanted them ahead of Reserve coverage in the ladder), and the company wants it. Then you say that the old system favored a Y ahead of a OOBWS, which I understand to mean the new system doesn't. Under that context, the OOBWS already is included ahead of RES. So what is the argument about, exactly?

If you're trying to say that the coverage should be WS>Y>OOBWS, then that would be acceptable.
Quote: I'm taking the family out to SLC for a week to teach my son how to ski. Where's the good snow, hotels that shuttle and reasonable lift tickets...it's been awhile for me. I need a refresher.
Also look at Solitude up Big Cottonwood..they give Delta discounts with ID..basically full day ticket for half day price. Great diversity of terrain from groomers to back bowl, away from Sundance, has a Kyle alpine village at the base but I don't know how expensive..great snow and best local secret around.

Have fun..
Quote: Hey sailing,

To be perfectly honest, I've re-read your OOBWS stuff a couple of times, and I'm confused. You're saying OOBWS ahead of Reserves is a good thing (the OP wanted them ahead of Reserve coverage in the ladder), and the company wants it. Then you say that the old system favored a Y ahead of a OOBWS, which I understand to mean the new system doesn't. Under that context, the OOBWS already is included ahead of RES. So what is the argument about, exactly?

If you're trying to say that the coverage should be WS>Y>OOBWS, then that would be acceptable.
That is exactly what I am saying. Currently crew scheduling gets to decide if a OOBWS is awarded after looking at their reserve coverage. Under the old system a OOBWS went ahead of reserve coverage unless a reserve went yellow high for that flying. Even if crew scheduling had 30 reserves sitting around they had to award the OOBWS unless a reserve puts a yellow high in for the flying.
The change was a concession the company demanded in the 1113 contract so they could better manage pilot utilization.
16674  17174  17574  17624  17664  17670  17671  17672  17673  17674  17675  17676  17677  17678  17684  17724  17774  18174  18674 
Page 17674 of 20173
Go to