Originally Posted by KC10 FATboy
(Post 566433)
Question .. for thos of you who have been with Delta and through a furlough, what steps does the company take first?
Do they offer leaves of absences first? Or do they just his us all at once? |
Originally Posted by KC10 FATboy
(Post 566433)
Question .. for thos of you who have been with Delta and through a furlough, what steps does the company take first?
Do they offer leaves of absences first? Or do they just his us all at once? Still, I came back, in spite of other lucrative options. I really like flying for Delta and I love the guys/girls I fly with. The way DALPA handled those of us who were furloughed was exemplary. |
Originally Posted by Xray678
(Post 566413)
I heard him say he would hold the line on scope at 70 seats. Then again, I heard all the ATL reps say the same thing. A week later they were selling us on how good a deal it was. And my favorite quote.....it's only 30 aircraft. What are we up to now, 150 or so 76 seaters?
Don't trust a word he says. |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 566287)
Bucking Bar, Can you tell me one time you heard our MEC state that it benefits us to outsource flying?
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 566287)
There are two things I notice from junior pilots when discussing scope. First they do not have a correct history of how scope has evolved at Delta.
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 566287)
The second thing is a total disregard for the economics involved in running any airline operation...I believe the 170/175 can be flown at a cost competitive basis at the mainline....These questions are all very complex economic items that require a lot of data and the right people to study to try and make a determination of what can work and what wont. I can assure you that no line pilots have that information.
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 566287)
I know the MEC and the vast majority of Delta pilots feel the 170/175 falls on the mainline side of the equation....The single most critical error was allowing the gross weight increase that brought the 170/175 to DCI. That by the way occurred before Moak and almost anyone involved with the current MEC.
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 566287)
What we need is the ability to negotiate from a position of power. We have not had that in a long time.
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 566287)
How many new hire pilots are aware that ASA once flew 4 engine 90 seat jets for Delta in the 80's. How many are aware of the Ron Allen threat to outsource everything smaller then the 757's which could have happened under the scope of the time. We rolled it back then and we can roll it back in the future.
We need however to make this about scope and not about trying to tell management how to run their airline. Scope the flying and let management decide how they want to handle it. I'm glad to read your opinion "scope the flying and let management...." but you contradict yourself with your economic argument that Delta pilots can not perform the flying without forcing Delta out of the marketplace. Consider that DCI's costs include:
It is my opinion that pilots do not buy airplanes. A union's role is to remove the question of who flies them. Certainly there is room for win / win negotiations and Compass is one of those opportunities. Can you explain why we are going the opposite direction? If we are trying to make Compass "sale-able" how does that benefit us? |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 566477)
It will be 255 before we know it.
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 566477)
The wind direction has changed. Our MEC better realize this. All we ask is that they represent the interests and desires of the whole group.
Maybe you and whoever else makes up "we" can get our scope changed on your own with your "contacts". Of course, those guys you left behind at ASA may call you a ladder puller:D Or maybe "we" will realize that there is a contract that spells all this out, and that contract is amendable in 2012. |
Originally Posted by Xray678
(Post 566413)
I And my favorite quote.....it's only 30 aircraft. What are we up to now, 150 or so 76 seaters?
Hint: How many 76 seat jets did NWA bring with them through the merger? Hint: How many mainline aircraft were required when the number was 30? Or should we not trust a word you say?:p |
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 566654)
The current number of 76 seaters allowed is 153, and if there are any furloughs that number drops to 127. 255 is the total number of 70 or greater seat airframes allowed. The only way to get to 255 76 seaters is a contractual change or mainline growth. That 255 number came from what was allowed under the pre-merger DAL and NWA scope. We're still about 30 70 seat airplanes under that cap.
I know the contract. I am just stating, that we will get to the 255 one way or another. Then you will see mainline shrink. It's good that a guy with so many management contacts now speaks for the group...:rolleyes: Weren't you ASA management before? NO, a management pilot but not management in the sense you are thinking Seems strange that you holler about scope when that's how you built your qualifications and contacts to get your Delta job.FWIW I had a DAL job long before I had most of these contacts. Pre 9-11 that is.I complain about this all of the time. Funny thing is, management will do what is best for them and the company. I know that. They will only play their part. Who I have an issue with is DALPA. They are making this way to easy. Maybe you and whoever else makes up "we" can get our scope changed on your own with your "contacts". Of course, those guys you left behind at ASA may call you a ladder puller:D Or maybe "we" will realize that there is a contract that spells all this out, and that contract is amendable in 2012. |
Originally Posted by KC10 FATboy
(Post 566433)
Question .. for thos of you who have been with Delta and through a furlough, what steps does the company take first?
Do they offer leaves of absences first? Or do they just his us all at once?
ACL has mentioned a small bid prior to SOC, then a big big afterwards. I bet he is right. The question for people like me who are getting displaced by a slim margin, should we reinstate to the 767 (or 737) and risk getting immediately displaced again, or hang out and wait for something like the DC9 / A320 to come to Atlanta, or run off and join an aid group to some equatorial island paradise? (best way to get your cash out of the US tax free, BTW) |
standby ....
|
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 566721)
Slowplay, that's a pretty low blow. This is a marketplace of ideas and ACL65 contributes more good information than most of us (certainly more than I do). We should try to avoid turning this into a Flight Info type board where pilots debate individual pilots, instead of ideas. Usually it is the side that is losing the debate on logical grounds that starts throwing poo around the monkey cages. (I'm not saying you did throw poo, just encouraging everyone to not crap in their hand).
I have worked for and will continue to work towards pilots being part of the Top of the management team. It solves many issues. I am not talking about VP of Ops. I am talking about the true positions of leadership. As a pilot I can say that it is easy to be taught the ways of creative financing et al, it is much harder to teach a finance guys the intricacies of operations. (FWIW, IMHO RA has good operational knowledge, he is the best CEO I have seen with that skill) You bring up an interesting point about the number of permitted aircraft, a friend observed:[/SIZE][/SIZE][/FONT][/FONT][/U][/U] For those of us keeping a scope score:
Is a waiver of JCBA 1.B.40.e, next? |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:59 AM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands