|
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 836419)
Agreed. DAL is great at contingency plans. It will be interesting to watch.
|
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 836834)
Also, I do not care who maintains the jet, and or holds the lean against their balance sheet. We can fly them and pay a service fee to TSH for dry leasing the jet. DAL wants is off their balance sheet, great, that does not preclude delta pilots from flying it.
Think outside the traditional box. As far as we know, DAL still owns the jets.....yes? I guess you mean negotiating a sale of the jets to TSH? Or did DAL just sell 36+ E-Jets for $20 mil? |
Originally Posted by satchip
(Post 836846)
I would love to see mainline jets fly those routes and pax. I just don't think we have the ability to do it very short notice. As for us flying the 170, not a bad idea. We have pay rates published but the training costs would be a bundle and the time to spin us up.
If the company didn't realize what was in their contract, and now they have to figure out how to fix it, that is THEIR problem. Lack of planning on their part does NOT constitute an emergency on our part. If they want to fly the jets, fine. We have pay rates all set to go. WE planned for it, and we're all set. Besides. They don't have to park the jets. Just pull 6 seats out of each, and have then count towards the 255 versus the 153. There are quite a few DC-9-30s in the desert with good cycles left. Fully paid with a training program and sim capacity in excess. They could EASILY surge the -9 to make up the difference, and it would be with our own pilots. Any other solution that doesn't involve DAL pilots, and we can simply say "a contract is a contract"....hmmm, where have I heard that before? Nu |
They can start
Originally Posted by satchip
(Post 836846)
Thanks for the thoughtful response. I see what you mean but do we have the capability to surge the 320 fleet to cover that flying? Aren't we stretched pretty thin already in that fleet. At least that is what I gather from guys posting here. As for the 9s, same story is it not? Besides what is the casm difference between the block 30s and 40s and the Ejet? ACL would know.
I would love to see mainline jets fly those routes and pax. I just don't think we have the ability to do it very short notice. As for us flying the 170, not a bad idea. We have pay rates published but the training costs would be a bundle and the time to spin us up. I'm not advocating any position here, just trying to get some rational thinking going. Scope is a very emotional issue, for me as well as most every one here. Emotions as strong as that tend to cloud ones thinking. We need to let our leaders know what is unacceptable but trust them to do the right thing, for ourselves and the company, because our destinies are tied together. |
I'd say if they want to get out of parking those jets then we need to open up section 6 negotiations immediately. No more loas, renegotiate the whole Pwa.
|
Originally Posted by satchip
(Post 836789)
Ah, but there is the rub. If the company has to reduce the number of 76'ers to 85, that is a lot of lift taken out of the system. That is a lot of revenue lost and that equals less money for us too. Especially going into sec 6 negotiations, a profitable company is important to us.
I'm not advocating we roll over, not in the least. Just pointing out the Law of Unintended Consequences. How would we replace that lift? Do we have enough mainline lift to fill in? Or would those routes go to other DCI carriers? It's something we will have to think through, not make a knee jerk reaction, in either direction. My guess is if it came down to it, the company would ignore the provision, make us grieve it, and use the time to come up with a solution. In fact, that may be the best course of action. Can you say MD90s? |
Originally Posted by Ad Lib
(Post 836706)
Jobs As a Delta pilot I want to see more Delta pilots. As an ALPA member, I want to see ALPA members taken care of. Give at least the current Compass & Mesaba pilots Delta ratio seniority numbers at the bottom of the list. That fixes the issue of the future flow (by killing it for future hires) and fixes the issue of promises made to the current pilots. Numbers also protect current Delta pilots. Unity also protects management by redistributing longevity costs. If the Compass / Mesaba guys don't want the deal, they can opt out. If Delta pilots could flow down off certificate, there is no reason why our former partners in this flow agreement can not enjoy flowing up across certificates. |
Originally Posted by reddog25
(Post 836848)
Yes it does...DAL doesn't want to pay the pay/benefits for DAL pilots...It's the new B-Scale and DAL won't let that go....it IS the traditional box.
|
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 836834)
Also, I do not care who maintains the jet, and or holds the lean against their balance sheet. We can fly them and pay a service fee to TSH for dry leasing the jet. DAL wants is off their balance sheet, great, that does not preclude delta pilots from flying it.
Think outside the traditional box. |
Nu, you have an easy solution. It's not an easy problem. Your easy solution has too many assumptions.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:12 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands