Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)
-   -   Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/36912-any-latest-greatest-about-delta.html)

KC10 FATboy 02-08-2011 11:31 AM

When I ordered by 75/76 books a month ago, they didn't even send me Jepps since they're in the jets. I feel slighted, but only slightly.

slowplay 02-08-2011 11:56 AM


Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 944050)
  • How much money could Delta have saved if we simply took NWA's airplanes and flying and made their pilot group restart their careers at the employment office? ... (those concerned about political correctness can swap Delta for NWA, makes no difference, NWA could have made Delta pilots start over for the example)


    Specious and argumentative question. Both NWA and DAL pilots "owned" the flying that they brought in the merger through scope. We don't "own" the flying currently being subcontracted.


    Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 944050)
    • In 2007 when Delta absorbed a few thousand ASA employees, they were allowed to keep their longevity. ALPA members (pilots) were the only employees forced to quit and re-hire at Delta, starting from scratch. Some pilots transferred into management, maintenance, training (etc) so they could keep their longevity as they came to Delta. They did not get seniority, but they kept their pay, weeks of vacation and travel pass date. Why are some pilots treated different than any other employees and any other pilots?

    You'll have to ask Delta and ASA management that question, but your story is incomplete and inaccurate. Delta took over ramp services for all DCI in ATL. Note that they didn't take a whole host of ASA ground employees from outstations, pilots or flight attendants. So it wasn't just pilots. The PanAm acquisition of certain assets comes to mind in the way ASA employees that came to Delta were treated.


    Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 944050)
    Longevity is not a reason not to pursue unity. History tells us longevity has not been a problem when management, or ALPA, wanted a merger.

    Agreed. Economics is something that has to be taken into account in a business transaction. You must understand the value your counterparty places on a particular item if you don't currently have it and wish to posess it.



    Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 944050)
    To pre-empt your reply that management does not want a merger ... there are numerous answers and possibilities:

    You should have stopped...prior to the dots!:D


    Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 944050)
    Everything is a negotiation. My quest for an objective economic analysis is to learn as best we can where the point is hat management would want to use Delta pilots to perform Delta flying. Then the membership has a choice to make.

    Yup, it is a negotiation. There are two parties to that negotiation. As I've said before, the analysis has been done. You can probably do some of your own just based on labor costs from Form 41 data. As to the ASA's get our pseudo-lawyer CheckEssential to go back to the bankruptcy era and search if any of the bankrupt carriers ASA's were ever made public. I don't know, but doubt they were as that is highly sensitive competitive data. Most of that was redacted from the bankruptcy record at least in Delta's case. In other words, unless you get a job with ALPA E&FA, you're probably not going to see them...;)

    acl65pilot 02-08-2011 12:16 PM


    Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 943949)
    Any 757/767 guys have any input on how the ship sets are working out? I fly on Friday, and was wondering if I need a backup..


    They are great. We got on our 767 to find three full sets, and an alternate kit as well. It will take a little time to get used to them, but they are awesome.

    shiznit 02-08-2011 12:31 PM


    Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 944123)
    Specious and argumentative question. Both NWA and DAL pilots "owned" the flying that they brought in the merger through scope. We don't "own" the flying currently being subcontracted.

    Umm, we did "own it". In fact we do have the ability to "own" all of it again. We have amended our Section 1 to except a specified number of "permitted aircraft types" to be flown outside our CBA. Exceptions can be undone. Oh yeah, and no limit of the aircraft above the minimum can be flown by Delta Pilots, so yes, even theoretically we still "own" a portion of that flying (even though mgt. has not chosen to fly over that number).

    "Specious and argumentative". That disappoints me. Specious="misleading in appearance". I fail to see that quality to Bar's comments.
    Argumentative: certainly, the whole premise is to have constructive, diverse and potentially contrarian arguments to endeavor others to think about all aspects of a problem and formulate a cogent strategy.

    Again, you are tossing out emotional trigger words that serve only to inflame and entrench an opposing view.


    Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 944123)
    Yup, it is a negotiation. There are two parties to that negotiation. As I've said before, the analysis has been done. You can probably do some of your own just based on labor costs from Form 41 data. As to the ASA's get our pseudo-lawyer CheckEssential to go back to the bankruptcy era and search if any of the bankrupt carriers ASA's were ever made public. I don't know, but doubt they were as that is highly sensitive competitive data. Most of that was redacted from the bankruptcy record at least in Delta's case. In other words, unless you get a job with ALPA E&FA, you're probably not going to see them...;)

    The whole point of Bar's is to MAKE ALPA EF&A DO THE RESEARCH!!! Bring back a report in executive session if that is what it takes, but get it done. Then we can have a MEC that can make a fully, complete look at that picture and help us determine how much we selling our jobs for. Then bring a more sanitized report to the membership that says "yes we think those jobs are valuable enough to get back or NO, the costs outweigh the benefits, but we did take a CURRENT in depth, and comprehensive look at the numbers."


    Nobody says we are guaranteed to like the answer, nor can we expect ALPA to divulge confidential information. What we can expect is to hear the leadership say something along the lines of:

    Originally Posted by DALPA MEC
    "We hear you, we understand you don't like it. We will update the analysis of current excepted flying to determine the potential costs and benefits. ALPA made mistakes in the past by "selling" our flying. We realize that we are barely the majority of pilots in the network flying Delta passengers on Delta tickets in Delta liveried aircraft. We will not sell out any pilot job senior or junior any more, and we will do our best to regain and enhance our standing within the Delta Air Line network."


    gloopy 02-08-2011 12:57 PM

    And the total cost once determined, can then be broken down into how much everything would cost, just 51 seats and up, the 70 seaters or just the 76 seaters. I doubt bringing the 76 seaters to the mainline would break the bank. We can at least afford that, since it is the primary DC-9 replacement aircraft so far (and even if the MD90's come on line as promised, there is no reason to outsource a 76 seat dual class jet anyway).

    iaflyer 02-08-2011 01:14 PM


    Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 944137)
    They are great. We got on our 767 to find three full sets, and an alternate kit as well. It will take a little time to get used to them, but they are awesome.

    Once I remember I wasn't carrying them around nor doing the revision, I got over any angst in about ten seconds.

    Jughead 02-08-2011 01:18 PM

    FYI...the going rate for Jepp binders on eBay seems to range anywhere from $10 to $75.

    Sell early and often. :p

    Bucking Bar 02-08-2011 01:36 PM

    Slow, it is a very truthful question when you consider ASA did have its own code, was bought, stripped of its code and its pilots had to apply and get hired with a complete loss of longevity and seniority. The Northwest merger is an interesting contrast. The only people with the right to be angry about that are ACL and his ilk. ACL65, amigo, if I upset you by the example, I apologize.

    Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 944123)
    We don't "own" the flying currently being subcontracted.

    Then why did ALPA intercede on our behalf to stop ASA from negotiating scope to protect "its" flying from non union whipsaw?

    The ugly truth is that we (our MEC and Management) want that flying done as cheaply as possible. In concept, the net cost savings is used to cross collateralize our pay.

    We still make legal claim to control of that flying. If we have in fact lost control of our scope, yours is the first admission I've heard. I find it highly alarming!

    Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 944123)
    ... your story is incomplete and inaccurate. Delta took over ramp services for all DCI in ATL. Note that they didn't take a whole host of ASA ground employees from outstations, pilots or flight attendants. So it wasn't just pilots. The PanAm acquisition of certain assets comes to mind in the way ASA employees that came to Delta were treated.

    Actually they did take staff from outstations and managers run back and forth from division to division like the single company it was. While trying to find an exception, you overlook the point that longevity has never stood in the way of a transaction that anyone wanted done. It has always been figured out.

    Delta & ALPA owe nobody anything if we simply cancel our contracts for outsourced work.

    Bucking Bar 02-08-2011 01:40 PM


    Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 944123)
    As I've said before, the analysis has been done. You can probably do some of your own just based on labor costs from Form 41 data. As to the ASA's get our pseudo-lawyer CheckEssential to go back to the bankruptcy era and search if any of the bankrupt carriers ASA's were ever made public. I don't know, but doubt they were as that is highly sensitive competitive data. Most of that was redacted from the bankruptcy record at least in Delta's case. In other words, unless you get a job with ALPA E&FA, you're probably not going to see them...;)

    The President of our Association, our Master Chairman and my Council Chair are on record stating an analysis has not been performed as of last fall.

    I would suggest any member in good standing who is curious, ask the question next time you see your Rep, or a member of our MEC Administration.

    ACL65, care to post the confirmation?

    Bucking Bar 02-08-2011 01:50 PM


    Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 944149)
    And the total cost once determined, can then be broken down into how much everything would cost, just 51 seats and up, the 70 seaters or just the 76 seaters. I doubt bringing the 76 seaters to the mainline would break the bank. We can at least afford that, since it is the primary DC-9 replacement aircraft so far (and even if the MD90's come on line as promised, there is no reason to outsource a 76 seat dual class jet anyway).

    Let me re phrase the question slightly. What if we just let those contracts on 76 seats die as the airplanes expire?

    What concerns me about these new contracts, is that we are signing up for long term deals which tap our revenue at the roots. THis harms our future competitiveness and flexibility.

    What really concerns me is that we lose control over that capacity. If fuel prices head to $200bbl again the only capacity management can park in a hurry is small jets at mainline. The MD88 is a prime target since its costs per seat mile are higher than other alternatives.

    Our junior pilots are the accumulator in the system.


    All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:33 PM.


    Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands