Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
10-11-2010, 09:56 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,273
Originally Posted by scambo1
-----------
Agreed, or 12 hour int'l shortcall. One of those equal pay for equal work things. Isn't that like a trade union mantra?
And ACL,
I never knew you could be shortcalled for a trip that reported outside your s/c window. That just seems extremely wrong to me. I think I would have to be unavailable for that, as opposed to readily available.
Agreed, or 12 hour int'l shortcall. One of those equal pay for equal work things. Isn't that like a trade union mantra?
And ACL,
I never knew you could be shortcalled for a trip that reported outside your s/c window. That just seems extremely wrong to me. I think I would have to be unavailable for that, as opposed to readily available.
Two things here. The first is DALPA did not negotiate a 12 hour short call for domestic and leave the international pilots hanging. In the evolution and improvement of reserve at Delta we started with 19 days on call, 24 hours a day with 2 hours to report. That has evolved over the years to the current system where a pilot is responsible for 6 short call days instead of 19. Short call for both domestic and international was 24 hours. Along came Witlow which essentially outlawed a 24 hour short call. Domestic was reduced to 12 hours since nothing else is workable under the rule. Witlow sadly did not effect international. If Witlow did apply to international you would be unable to cover many long duty day trips such as TLV, IST, ATH, VCE ect...
On the subject of reserve you can never be forced to cover a trip on a short call basis outside the shortcall window. You are either on short call or long call. They can ask or offer premium pay but its not required. They can contact you near the end of the window with a trip leaving outside the window however that would apply only in a international situation.
Last edited by sailingfun; 10-11-2010 at 10:13 AM.
10-11-2010, 09:56 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,522
Originally Posted by Denny Crane
3 hours.
Denny
Denny
10-11-2010, 10:03 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,273
Originally Posted by NuGuy
Heyas Bar,
Something is up. We do have attrition, and staffing is fairly tight. People medical out and quit all the time, so the mandatory retirement number is not a good one to use. 178 have dropped off the list since Jan 2010.
I don't see the MD-90s materializing as fast as some predicted.
The long rumored 747-400s, -800s, 330s, C series, 195s, etc, etc are not happening.
We can increase utilization some, and sure, airplanes are supposedly coming out of the desert, BUT, we have 400 fewer pilots now than we had at the closing of the merger BEFORE those airplanes were parked.
I don't beleive in derivatives. It lets management (and ALPA) weave a fog cloud over the pilots who don't take the time to decode the numbers.
I believe in simple numbers that tell the story. More pilots = good, fewer pilots = bad. We have fewer pilots, so that is bad. I don't see us even breaking even on the pilot count despite 300 new hires and record profits. I see only RJs where there was only mainline metal 12 months ago.
And we're supposedly not hiring in 2011.
Pretty simple math.
Nu
Something is up. We do have attrition, and staffing is fairly tight. People medical out and quit all the time, so the mandatory retirement number is not a good one to use. 178 have dropped off the list since Jan 2010.
I don't see the MD-90s materializing as fast as some predicted.
The long rumored 747-400s, -800s, 330s, C series, 195s, etc, etc are not happening.
We can increase utilization some, and sure, airplanes are supposedly coming out of the desert, BUT, we have 400 fewer pilots now than we had at the closing of the merger BEFORE those airplanes were parked.
I don't beleive in derivatives. It lets management (and ALPA) weave a fog cloud over the pilots who don't take the time to decode the numbers.
I believe in simple numbers that tell the story. More pilots = good, fewer pilots = bad. We have fewer pilots, so that is bad. I don't see us even breaking even on the pilot count despite 300 new hires and record profits. I see only RJs where there was only mainline metal 12 months ago.
And we're supposedly not hiring in 2011.
Pretty simple math.
Nu
My understanding is that they plan on hiring as many as 300 pilots in the fall of 2011. Much the same as this fall. That of course is subject to change at any time.
10-11-2010, 10:03 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: west coast wannabe
Posts: 815
Originally Posted by nwaf16dude
thanks... so, it 84% enough to finally get a line around this place?
looks like it was this month...hope it stays that way. Breaking news...commuting to 24hour short call sucks.
looks like it was this month...hope it stays that way. Breaking news...commuting to 24hour short call sucks.
Nope, try 60% in MSPM88, and we're not even in winter yet.
10-11-2010, 10:06 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,273
Originally Posted by Check Essential
Right on the money.
Cost of medical care is a huge factor in that decision.
Cost of medical care is a huge factor in that decision.
10-11-2010, 10:08 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,522
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
btw- it would hurt me but I'd like to start setting a precedent that furloughed pilots are counted as employed during an SLI.
10-11-2010, 10:13 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,989
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
btw- it would hurt me but I'd like to start setting a precedent that furloughed pilots are counted as employed during an SLI.
The effect will be to trade furloughs.
Why should employed pilots be furloughed to make way for pilots from another carrier?
How about plan B: Hold management over a barrel to renegotiate agreements during a merger to FORCE the airline to do its own flying? IE while management is at the table, close scope loopholes. That results in a win for both sides.
I think Delta did the right thing in giving furloughed pilots back their longevity.
10-11-2010, 10:14 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: 737A
Posts: 1,890
Originally Posted by sailingfun
Several that I have talked with have decided to delay retirement because they are making to much money. Two were going this fall but are going to stick around until at least next fall because of how much they made this summer. They want at least one more summer to boost retirement savings.
Trying to predict when people are going to retire is a losing business. I wish I had a dollar for every captain that told me he was going to retire at 60 or earlier. Since they are able to drop down to zero whenever they want to (if reserve coverage is good), I'm amazed when anyone goes before they are forced to.
10-11-2010, 10:14 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,838
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
Nu, I think you are correct.
The really scary part is that the precedents set were ugly:
If NWA/DAL methodology were used (pure relative seniority) the Alaska 737 Captains would be mixed throughout our 767 ranks and their First Officers would be narrow body Captains. In either event, they will be so much more senior to me that it really does not matter.
I tend to think Hawaiian is a better strategic move. I think an airline or two on the west coast needs to go away before we buy Alaska. If we merge with Alaska now, it could be us that ends up having to pull capacity down to avoid losing big money out there.
The really scary part is that the precedents set were ugly:
- Ours was not a category ratio. It was a ratio'd list top to bottom without regard for current category.
- Unknown and unprovable future events, such as retirements were credited as "equities" in the merger. This makes for a real wild card.
If NWA/DAL methodology were used (pure relative seniority) the Alaska 737 Captains would be mixed throughout our 767 ranks and their First Officers would be narrow body Captains. In either event, they will be so much more senior to me that it really does not matter.
I tend to think Hawaiian is a better strategic move. I think an airline or two on the west coast needs to go away before we buy Alaska. If we merge with Alaska now, it could be us that ends up having to pull capacity down to avoid losing big money out there.
Agree.
If a true category merge was done, you'd have senior ALK pilots taking %50 seniority hits, which would be pretty indefensible to the layman.
Straight ratio would play out as you described.
You'd need 25 year fences to make it play out right, or really strong quotas (technically, NWA/REP was a quota system, not a fence) and if that's the case, you might as well go DOH for the methodology.
Ugly all around.
I'd rather see HI also. WB flying, a HND slot and get the 717s on the property.
Nu
10-11-2010, 10:39 AM
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
So, we are not hiring to keep up with attrition?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
