I guess there will be a lot of DHing to LAX then. That could be a good deal, especially for commuters.

Are 10 of the 16 LAX-SFO?

At compass we had
day 1.. Between 3-4 legs to get to LAX
day 2 and 3 ...LAX shuttle 5 legs a day
day 4 work your way back to DTW.

It was worth 28 hour 4 day

So if you have 2 jets at different times leave DTW it can be done

Looks like 8 per day to SFO and back. Could be done with 2 jets, but it's spread over 15 or 16 hours, so you'd need 4 crews for one day's operation.

LAS and PDX have 4 and 3 per day, respectively, and could be done with 1 plane each, but would need 2 crews per day each due to max duty day. So that's 4 jets per day and 8 crews per day to operate, roughly.

For the same time period they only have the one 717 flight inbound to LAX from LAS via SLC and points east. None into PDX or SFO. So there's 7 more crews to pre-position each day. Unless they add more flights to one of the spoke cities, the only way to do that is deadhead from DTW, ATL or NYC, and that's the better part of a day, so figure two days DH on a 5 day rotation to the west coast... like I said, good deal for commuters!

Does anybody know if United pilots pay dues on their profit sharing? I assume they do, but don't know for sure. I do know that they do not get a DC plan contribution on their profit sharing payout like we do.

How is that relevant? ALPA shouldn't collect dues on anyone's profit sharing.

And didn't United's MEC lead the charge to block a dues decrease?

How many millions will be going to ALPA as a result, and what will it be used for? Hint: no more than a fraction will be returned to the Delta pilot group.

You certainly are going to need enough "bridge" flights to get the crews back to base, but it doesn't require 5 legs to or from. They could be laying over in any of the bridge cities or beyond.

I imagine you will see more bridge flights before you will see massive amounts of DH's after the initial spool up.

I agree, if that's how they intend to operate it. But there aren't any except the one. And really, unless they bridge through SLC, I don't see how there can be. And if they did bridge a bunch of flights through SLC, there'd probably be a base there too. But I don't see that happening. It's not like they'll be flying DSM-LAX or OMA-PDX. That's why I think this whole thing points towards a new category in LAX sooner than later. JMHO.

Our next Contract: Food for (very simplistic) thought.

ALL new hires are gong to NYC. Why? Because if you don't already live there you sure can't afford to move there now. Every AE that comes out has all those new hires in NYC folks flocking to bases with lower cost of living.

LAX is in the same position. All the folks in LA either commute by air from nearby, or they have been living in SoCal for decades. You will see, in the near future, LAX becoming a mix of super senior and super junior. Why? Because if you haven't established roots here long ago, you can't afford to move here now. If the 717 opens in LA, this will expedite this scenario.

So recently, I was flying with a super senior Capt who owns a bad arse beach house. Now I don't expect to have a beach house but I'd love to stop commuting and buy a decent house in a decent neighborhood within an hour and 1/2 drive of LAX. Can I do that? No f'in way. I grew up in SoCal but haven't lived there for 20 years. I was hired in '07 and have not been able to bid LAX until this summer. I would like to be able move back but on 8 year pay, no way.

For our next contract, profit sharing should be off the bargaining table (as in "Don't touch it"). I want a raise that will allow me and my family to live ANY of the domiciles that Delta has selected to base pilots. Its called a domicile for a reason, you are supposed to LIVE there. For those that say "Commuting is a choice," I call bull$hit. I can't afford to not to commute and please don't tell me to move to ATL.

My wife would love to live in Manhattan. I'd move there too, to make her happy, but can we move to NYC? No.

The pilot groups at all the majors have been beat down so much over the last decade and a half that they just shrug their shoulders and say, "Well I guess this is going to be the best we can do." (AA contract for example).

I want at least a 20% raise out the gate (you may want more and I'm on board with that too), the company can afford it. I want to live in MY DOMICILE and the company need to pay me so I can afford to live in THEIR DOMICILE.

Rant over,

Humboldt

It's relevant because I want to know the answer. I wasn't trying to add to any other discussion when I made the post, although after I made the post I discovered that the issue was discussed by someone else.

I'm trying to figure out if paying the dues is really tied to it being pensionable for us or if you still pay dues on profit sharing even if it is negotiated as not being pensionable with no retirement contribution like the United pilots have.

As for the United reps blocking the dues reduction that our reps were trying to get passed, I think you are right that they were a part of the group that blocked it. I have no idea why. I heard that it was sour grapes over not getting any of their pilots elected to any positions, but since that was at least second hand information I took it with a pretty big grain of salt and didn't give it a lot of credibility.

Excellent post. Unlike most companies who hire and pay accordingly talented people to work in cities with high cost of living ie: NY or LA, we pay one rate and expect everyone to get to work come he## or high water. 25 years ago, on our salaries, it could be done. Not today. There are twice as many people in the world today and living in those cities takes serious cash. Either give us a huge raise to account for that, or buy us tickets to get to work in those cities. There is no way someone hired today at DL could ever afford to buy a home in LA or NY that they could raise a family in and get to work on short call... ever. Commuting is certainly not a choice for those folks.