|
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 715188)
Just as a reminder, 5th Freedom "rights" aren't exactly rights. They are negotiated as part of an aviation treaty between two governments. That treaty is being renegotiated at this time. Hopefully it will result in an aviation enhancement, not Japanese protectionism.
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 715189)
Just a reminder that scope has been tightened since Moak has been your MEC chairman, and that the total number of RJ's flying under DCI/Airlink colors has decreased substantially. Delta is capped on the number of 70-76 seat aircraft without substantial mainline growth.
It was not the actions of ALPA or our MEC which have resulted in the reduction of DCI flying. The 50 seaters have been removed purely due to the poor economics of them. PLEASE stop using this to put Moak on a pedestal. HE AND ALPA HAD ZERO TO DO WITH THIS! |
Originally Posted by sinca3
(Post 715217)
Maybe it should read," Scope hasn't been loosened since Moak has been the MEC chair."
Also, the number of RJ's flying has decreased b/c the COMPANY made the decision due to poor economics...not b/c Moak, ALPA, or the pilots have demanded, negotiated, or just plan wanted the decrease.
Originally Posted by LeineLodge
(Post 715219)
Slow,
While I respect your insights and opinions, you've GOT TO stop using this line as a defense of Moak's and the MEC's scope stance. I agree they have done an outstanding job with the merger, SLI, etc, but the ONLY reason we have seen a "substantial" decrease in RJ flying is the economics of the 50 seater. If it were economically feasible and/or advantageous to the company for some other reason (stick it to labor during section 6 maybe) then every single one of those parked RJ's could come back. We need to take our very next opportunity to cinch up the RJ limits while they are down. It wouldn't cost the company anything (other than future flexibility) to agree to cap RJ's at their current number - don't have that number readily available - as opposed to the number our scope allows. Oh yeah, and once and for all maybe they could communicate their stance on scope, so we could all sleep a little better at night. I'm still not convinced that a deal won't be reached to allow CPZ or RAH 190/195's for a "short time" to bridge the gap to our "100 seaters." I would love to hear something official regarding our stance along the lines of NOT ONE MORE SEAT, NOT ONE MORE POUND, NOR ONE MORE AIRFRAME OVER THE CURRENT LIMITS. This may be our stance (and absolutely should be), but we'd never know since it hasn't been communicated. With your insight to the workings/stances of the MEC, can you make me/us feel better about this? It's not real comfortable with the threat coming from both sides (NB and WB's.) |
Originally Posted by LeineLodge
(Post 715219)
NOT ONE MORE SEAT, NOT ONE MORE POUND, NOR ONE MORE AIRFRAME OVER THE CURRENT LIMITS.
Thats all we want to hear is a firm stance that says that above. If we want lawyer double speak we'd go to the politico. We just want assurance that is the case. JUST SAY SCOPE! NOW, the problem as Slow has been highlighting is there are issues with this whole Asia deal. We're getting attacked at both the top and bottom end with the situation on the bottom end being clear as day but the top end being very confusing as to whether it is a good give and take or what have you. Actually, IMHO, we almost need to drop talking about Scope and start just referring to it simply as "Section 1". With JVs, alliances, replacement jets, etc. I'm starting to feel like I'm on another awful CBS reality tv game show. :mad: |
|
Oh boy. This is getting even more interesting.
Delta Says SkyTeam Willing to Invest More Than $1.02 Billion in JAL - WSJ.com |
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 715233)
Oh boy. This is getting even more interesting.
Delta Says SkyTeam Willing to Invest More Than $1.02 Billion in JAL - WSJ.com Coool. Negotiating in the media. Well, ears back tongue out and away we go! --- I think the Is Delta Hiring thread died. :( |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 715235)
Coool. Negotiating in the media.
Well, ears back tongue out and away we go! --- I think the Is Delta Hiring thread died. :( |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 715231)
Hurdles Remain for U.S.-Japan Open Skies Deal - WSJ.com
JAL to propose 40 pct cut to pension payouts-media | Industries | Industrials, Materials & Utilities | Reuters Haneda will cater to high-margin business travelers who are prepared to pay more expensive fares due to the airport's convenience – only 30 minutes from central Tokyo..." And that is why (and how) our current 5-th freedom rights might be devalued. Don't be fooled by the 11PM-6AM nonsense. As soon as a deal is done, the US will of course have no power to say Haneda ops should be night only, and "pouf!" we have a secondary Tokyo hub. |
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 715022)
Anybody familiar with the PWA able to answer this? I went from DTWDC9 B to DTW320 B Nov 20, 2008. I was displaced to DTWDC9 B Jun 1, 2009.
I think I incured a 2 year lock when I went to the 320 so can I be AE'd somewhere else, or am I stuck on the DC9 until Nov 2010? Or if the conversion date is after my 180 days post SOC recall rights expiration, am I released from my 2 yr freeze? Oh man, I've confused myself! :p Thanks in advance. :) |
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 715226)
Anyway the US can play hardball back and start squeezing the Japanese out of places like NY, LA, and Chicago?
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:37 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands