Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
01-02-2011 | 06:49 AM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
BTW Carl;
I am of the personal opinion that all Delta flying and 70% of Sky Team flying should be flown by pilots on the Delta Air Lines Pilot Seniority list!
We need to find a way to put the flying, not a specific airframe but the flying back on the list. There are solutions but people need to listen. (That includes all of us)
I am of the personal opinion that all Delta flying and 70% of Sky Team flying should be flown by pilots on the Delta Air Lines Pilot Seniority list!
We need to find a way to put the flying, not a specific airframe but the flying back on the list. There are solutions but people need to listen. (That includes all of us)
01-02-2011 | 07:15 AM
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
From: 320B
Sorry ACL,
Jack and Carl are exactly right. As Jack mentions, if the 51% Scope Sale occurs the damage will be done. It will happen so fast it will make your head spin. There is a difference between being "furloughed" and having your job "outsourced".
After 5 years off the property and out nearly a half a million in airline earnings, I don't plan on giving anyone the benefit of the doubt about what the feedback is. People are not going to listen to any "fear mongering", "the bigger RJs are place holders", "we need them for growth". That is why we are suspicious when Scope isn't mentioned or discussed by the MEC.
Although the Mitsubishi aircraft has made some sales, the real players will be the Big EMBs and the C Series. IMHO, somebody will be flying those aircraft as there is a huge gap between the 76 seat and A319 revenue market. With the company delevering the balance sheet (and good they are), I don't expect a large "new" aircraft order for us soon.
Carl is right in making it extremely painful for the Reps/MEC if a Scope Sale occurs. Personally, I believe it would go nuclear for the union in a New York minute and ALPA would be "out". The large RJ issue needs to be nipped in the bud at the start and a hard line taken.
Jack and Carl are exactly right. As Jack mentions, if the 51% Scope Sale occurs the damage will be done. It will happen so fast it will make your head spin. There is a difference between being "furloughed" and having your job "outsourced".
After 5 years off the property and out nearly a half a million in airline earnings, I don't plan on giving anyone the benefit of the doubt about what the feedback is. People are not going to listen to any "fear mongering", "the bigger RJs are place holders", "we need them for growth". That is why we are suspicious when Scope isn't mentioned or discussed by the MEC.
Although the Mitsubishi aircraft has made some sales, the real players will be the Big EMBs and the C Series. IMHO, somebody will be flying those aircraft as there is a huge gap between the 76 seat and A319 revenue market. With the company delevering the balance sheet (and good they are), I don't expect a large "new" aircraft order for us soon.
Carl is right in making it extremely painful for the Reps/MEC if a Scope Sale occurs. Personally, I believe it would go nuclear for the union in a New York minute and ALPA would be "out". The large RJ issue needs to be nipped in the bud at the start and a hard line taken.
Last edited by jetnwa; 01-02-2011 at 07:29 AM.
01-02-2011 | 07:26 AM
seeing the country...
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,015
Likes: 41
From: 73N A
Why not look at scope this way - would the pilot group, as a whole, be happy with a 20% pay raise?
Sure - let's just give away all flying above 300 seats. No biggie right, it's just a small part of our fleet. Plus, the entire pilot group benefits from the pay raise and those guys flying the big equipment were going to retire anyway.
Scope is very important - the pay rates don't matter if a bunch of pilot positions are lost. Look at Compass vs the DC-9. Sure, the DC-9 is a junior airplane, but each DC-9 that was parked because Compass came in had one Captain position that paid Captain's wages. I'm sure there are some FOs that would prefer a DC9 A position over a 320 or 757 B position.
Same thing can (and is) happening in the larger airplane. Air France's 380 is probably pretty efficient. What happens when they get more and need a place to fly them. Will we see them on CDG-ATL? Or Skyteam might find it's cheaper to fly Seoul-DTW with one of their new 380s vs Delta doing it with a 777.
Sure - let's just give away all flying above 300 seats. No biggie right, it's just a small part of our fleet. Plus, the entire pilot group benefits from the pay raise and those guys flying the big equipment were going to retire anyway.
Scope is very important - the pay rates don't matter if a bunch of pilot positions are lost. Look at Compass vs the DC-9. Sure, the DC-9 is a junior airplane, but each DC-9 that was parked because Compass came in had one Captain position that paid Captain's wages. I'm sure there are some FOs that would prefer a DC9 A position over a 320 or 757 B position.
Same thing can (and is) happening in the larger airplane. Air France's 380 is probably pretty efficient. What happens when they get more and need a place to fly them. Will we see them on CDG-ATL? Or Skyteam might find it's cheaper to fly Seoul-DTW with one of their new 380s vs Delta doing it with a 777.
01-02-2011 | 07:44 AM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
Sorry ACL,
Jack and Carl are exactly right. As Jack mentions, if the 51% Scope Sale occurs the damage will be done. It will happen so fast it will make your head spin. There is a difference between being "furloughed" and having your job "outsourced".
After 5 years off the property and out nearly a half a million in airline earnings, I don't plan on giving anyone the benefit of the doubt about what the feedback is. People are not going to listen to any "fear mongering", "the bigger RJs are place holders", "we need them for growth". That is why we are suspicious when Scope isn't mentioned or discussed by the MEC.
Although the Mitsubishi aircraft has made some sales, the real players will be the Big EMBs and the C Series. IMHO, somebody will be flying those aircraft as there is a huge gap between the 76 seat and A319 revenue market. With the company delevering the balance sheet (and good they are), I don't expect a large "new" aircraft order for us soon.
Carl is right in making it extremely painful for the Reps/MEC if a Scope Sale occurs. Personally, I believe it would go nuclear for the union in a New York minute and ALPA would be "out". The large RJ issue needs to be nipped in the bud at the start and a hard line taken.
Jack and Carl are exactly right. As Jack mentions, if the 51% Scope Sale occurs the damage will be done. It will happen so fast it will make your head spin. There is a difference between being "furloughed" and having your job "outsourced".
After 5 years off the property and out nearly a half a million in airline earnings, I don't plan on giving anyone the benefit of the doubt about what the feedback is. People are not going to listen to any "fear mongering", "the bigger RJs are place holders", "we need them for growth". That is why we are suspicious when Scope isn't mentioned or discussed by the MEC.
Although the Mitsubishi aircraft has made some sales, the real players will be the Big EMBs and the C Series. IMHO, somebody will be flying those aircraft as there is a huge gap between the 76 seat and A319 revenue market. With the company delevering the balance sheet (and good they are), I don't expect a large "new" aircraft order for us soon.
Carl is right in making it extremely painful for the Reps/MEC if a Scope Sale occurs. Personally, I believe it would go nuclear for the union in a New York minute and ALPA would be "out". The large RJ issue needs to be nipped in the bud at the start and a hard line taken.
I do not care how it is packaged, I will not be voting for anything that further relaxes the 76 seat limit. Same holds true for other scope as well.
All of the reps I have talked to say the decision is simple. If DAL wants to fly a bigger jet than 76 seats, they can, but it will be flown by Delta pilots. Period, end of story, not mincing of words.
I am what many would term a scope hawk and I am telling you that I am satisfied with their charge. Furthermore, if anything ever got our of MEC Council, I am convinced that even with a 100% pay bump it would be voted down. Guys see what DCI and other scope has done to career progression.
Keep their feet to the fire, but understand that all of the current reps ran on no scope sales. If anything it is one of the easiest decisions for them.
01-02-2011 | 07:49 AM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
Why not look at scope this way - would the pilot group, as a whole, be happy with a 20% pay raise?
Sure - let's just give away all flying above 300 seats. No biggie right, it's just a small part of our fleet. Plus, the entire pilot group benefits from the pay raise and those guys flying the big equipment were going to retire anyway.
Scope is very important - the pay rates don't matter if a bunch of pilot positions are lost. Look at Compass vs the DC-9. Sure, the DC-9 is a junior airplane, but each DC-9 that was parked because Compass came in had one Captain position that paid Captain's wages. I'm sure there are some FOs that would prefer a DC9 A position over a 320 or 757 B position.
Same thing can (and is) happening in the larger airplane. Air France's 380 is probably pretty efficient. What happens when they get more and need a place to fly them. Will we see them on CDG-ATL? Or Skyteam might find it's cheaper to fly Seoul-DTW with one of their new 380s vs Delta doing it with a 777.
Sure - let's just give away all flying above 300 seats. No biggie right, it's just a small part of our fleet. Plus, the entire pilot group benefits from the pay raise and those guys flying the big equipment were going to retire anyway.
Scope is very important - the pay rates don't matter if a bunch of pilot positions are lost. Look at Compass vs the DC-9. Sure, the DC-9 is a junior airplane, but each DC-9 that was parked because Compass came in had one Captain position that paid Captain's wages. I'm sure there are some FOs that would prefer a DC9 A position over a 320 or 757 B position.
Same thing can (and is) happening in the larger airplane. Air France's 380 is probably pretty efficient. What happens when they get more and need a place to fly them. Will we see them on CDG-ATL? Or Skyteam might find it's cheaper to fly Seoul-DTW with one of their new 380s vs Delta doing it with a 777.
In short on 380 equates to about three 767's worth of flying for us. It is not a block hr only metric.
I know how you feel, but at the end of the day we at DAL fly just over 50% of the North Atlantic lift based on the ratio of the JV. That is 50%+ for DAL pilots and 50%- for AF, KLM, and Alitalia combined.
If Virgin Atlantic is included in this JV I would hope to keep the current ratio the same.
01-02-2011 | 08:08 AM
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
On April 20, 2009 the ALPA Executive Board adopted a new merger policy. That policy was completely rewritten to adopt most of the principles of our merger including:
A cooperative approach to creating a merger process that meets the specific needs of the situation
Negotiation of the JCBA first with an emphasis on using the contract to achieve gains for the combined pilot group
A time limited arbitration process where the default panel is three neutral arbitrators
An emphasis on open communications to the pilot groups to avoid false expectations and promote a unified pilot group at the completion of the merger
The list of items that ere changed is too numerous, but you can examine the new policy on the ALPA web site.
I examined a three hundred+ page document dealing with airline mergers and a process similar to ours was never mentioned. It is extremely difficult to prove a negative, so I will just let the facts speak for themselves.
Below is an excerpt from the introduction to the policy:
MERGER AND FRAGMENTATION POLICY
SOURCE – In April 2009, the Executive Board adopted major revisions to ALPA Merger and Fragmentation Policy. Future amendments will be noted where they occur in the policy and will include the governing body and amendment date.
PART 1 –STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND PREAMBLE
The purpose of ALPA Merger Policy is to provide protection for the employment interests of ALPA represented flight deck crew members by establishing orderly and expeditious processes for (1) concluding a joint collective bargaining agreement (JCBA), (2) concluding the fair and equitable merger of seniority lists and (3) merging Master Executive Councils (MECs).
The policy rests on a number of premises:
· A successful merger requires the full support of ALPA MEC and Local Council leadership for its implementation.
· ALPA members will be kept informed and up to date through responsible communications, and an environment developed to foster unity and strength in negotiating the JCBA.
· Unity of purpose, based on close cooperation among Joint Negotiating Committee (JNC) members and between the participating MECs, is essential to bringing about a work force that will obtain benefit from the merger through successful negotiations.
· Integration of seniority lists is one step in the entire merger process; the merger is onetransaction, consisting of the seniority integration process, the contract negotiation process, the ratification process, andthe transition process (both as to the carriers and ALPA governance), all leading to a single pilot group and MEC.
A cooperative approach to creating a merger process that meets the specific needs of the situation
Negotiation of the JCBA first with an emphasis on using the contract to achieve gains for the combined pilot group
A time limited arbitration process where the default panel is three neutral arbitrators
An emphasis on open communications to the pilot groups to avoid false expectations and promote a unified pilot group at the completion of the merger
The list of items that ere changed is too numerous, but you can examine the new policy on the ALPA web site.
I examined a three hundred+ page document dealing with airline mergers and a process similar to ours was never mentioned. It is extremely difficult to prove a negative, so I will just let the facts speak for themselves.
Below is an excerpt from the introduction to the policy:
MERGER AND FRAGMENTATION POLICY
SOURCE – In April 2009, the Executive Board adopted major revisions to ALPA Merger and Fragmentation Policy. Future amendments will be noted where they occur in the policy and will include the governing body and amendment date.
PART 1 –STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND PREAMBLE
The purpose of ALPA Merger Policy is to provide protection for the employment interests of ALPA represented flight deck crew members by establishing orderly and expeditious processes for (1) concluding a joint collective bargaining agreement (JCBA), (2) concluding the fair and equitable merger of seniority lists and (3) merging Master Executive Councils (MECs).
The policy rests on a number of premises:
· A successful merger requires the full support of ALPA MEC and Local Council leadership for its implementation.
· ALPA members will be kept informed and up to date through responsible communications, and an environment developed to foster unity and strength in negotiating the JCBA.
· Unity of purpose, based on close cooperation among Joint Negotiating Committee (JNC) members and between the participating MECs, is essential to bringing about a work force that will obtain benefit from the merger through successful negotiations.
· Integration of seniority lists is one step in the entire merger process; the merger is onetransaction, consisting of the seniority integration process, the contract negotiation process, the ratification process, andthe transition process (both as to the carriers and ALPA governance), all leading to a single pilot group and MEC.
Carl
01-02-2011 | 08:17 AM
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
Carl;
I disagree. I do not know each and every rep and their ideals, but the ones that I do know would disagree adamantly with your assertion. Many like the idea of capping DCI at their current levels and going for a commitment from the company not to renew, modify, extend or write new DCI contracts. Give the reps a little credit. Most of the pilots representing you and I want the same things we do. The ones that do not agree with what their pilots want seem do be getting elected out of office.
I disagree. I do not know each and every rep and their ideals, but the ones that I do know would disagree adamantly with your assertion. Many like the idea of capping DCI at their current levels and going for a commitment from the company not to renew, modify, extend or write new DCI contracts. Give the reps a little credit. Most of the pilots representing you and I want the same things we do. The ones that do not agree with what their pilots want seem do be getting elected out of office.
Tim states that they are listening to the pilots. Well, tell them your opinion, and educate the guys you fly with as to why your opinion is correct. ALPA states they will take the majority position forward. I say make the majority position about "restoration" of "pay" and SCOPE, as well as every other item you can think of. If that becomes the will of the group it WILL be come the MEC's position.
Write another letter O'Malley...and do it quick!
Carl
01-02-2011 | 08:21 AM
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
Carl
01-02-2011 | 08:28 AM
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
From: 320B
ACL,
We will see. I will put it to you this way, I am senior to all the 07/08 DAL new hires and I am "stashing cash" like you can't believe. Just because you and I would vote "No" doesn't mean that 51% won't vote "Yes" behind the closed doors of their home. Don't worry though, I am sure such a deal would include "Super Enhanced Furlough Protection" to make it easier to handle but we all know what that is worth.
There is a saying in Finance and that is "follow the money". There will be intense pressure to have someone fly the C Series et al for the 100 seat gap. Boeing is up to their hips in alligators to do a new aircraft and I just don't see a re-engined A320 being a player. When the company lays a stack of money on the table for a sell out, we will see how the "spin" will be handled. I just don't see the company wanting to fly the EMB/CSeries aircraft here. Both companies (NWA and DAL) have "studied" the 100 seat replacement since I was a new hire and well, you do the math as they don't want to add debt to the balance sheet with a new aircraft order.
It would be a lot cheaper to just bribe the pilot group for a deal instead.
We will see. I will put it to you this way, I am senior to all the 07/08 DAL new hires and I am "stashing cash" like you can't believe. Just because you and I would vote "No" doesn't mean that 51% won't vote "Yes" behind the closed doors of their home. Don't worry though, I am sure such a deal would include "Super Enhanced Furlough Protection" to make it easier to handle but we all know what that is worth.
There is a saying in Finance and that is "follow the money". There will be intense pressure to have someone fly the C Series et al for the 100 seat gap. Boeing is up to their hips in alligators to do a new aircraft and I just don't see a re-engined A320 being a player. When the company lays a stack of money on the table for a sell out, we will see how the "spin" will be handled. I just don't see the company wanting to fly the EMB/CSeries aircraft here. Both companies (NWA and DAL) have "studied" the 100 seat replacement since I was a new hire and well, you do the math as they don't want to add debt to the balance sheet with a new aircraft order.
It would be a lot cheaper to just bribe the pilot group for a deal instead.
Last edited by jetnwa; 01-02-2011 at 08:42 AM.
01-02-2011 | 08:30 AM
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
Anyone that think that their reps will Ratify a TA that sells more small jets is out to lunch and or has not talked to their reps. If the Neg Committee came back with a TA that had that in it, I would want to be a fly on the wall in that closed session. Every reps from every base I talk to states that scope sales are unacceptable.
Carl
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
