While I appreciate you quoting FDR, you have to realized that you are quoting a past President who probably looked at the federal government as being more powerful than any President ever has. He, and his successor (Truman), were having no part of any opposition from labor unions, to private businesses, to Supreme Court Justices. If you got in their way, they would go through you our around you.


To borrow your FDR quote again....


".....[ BLANK ] manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government."

....I'd like to point out that Roosevelt and Truman used that as an excuse to do everything they did. You can fill in the blank with, "A Supreme Court that doesn't defer to me," or "Private businesses that won't negotiate with their employees," and finish each quote off with, "So, I should be able to pack the court in my favor" (A switch in time saves Nine.), or "So, I should be able to orchestrate a federal takeover of any private business under the guise of National Security." (Youngstown).

In essence, FDR was against public sector, federal unions because he didn't want anything getting in the way of his federal government. Unless you are posting the quote for the same reason, you are using it out of context.

OK hold on a minute.....there is definitely no increase in frames from the Dc9/ MD 90 swap.....unless you only look at the -50's to the md90's....but if you start at the date of merger....we have parked many -30's and -40's....more than the 90's we are getting

How so? :confused:

Also as we go forward lets not forget the DC9 pay rate was also for the 78 seat DC-9-10........never ever forget

I get the feeling that "nevermind" was for me. :D

Thanks. ftb will have a chart any second now, I'm sure.

Aug 2009 NWA had 68 DC-9's, Delta had 16 MD90's.....we will go to 0 DC-9's and 58 MD-90's

and don't take this the wrong way but the -30 was flying around with 100 seats...these are going to fly around with 160....they are not replacements. Nice to have .... but the other ac that have been ordered are DC-9 replacements.

A "replacement" doesn't have a 62 % gauge increase.

No, and noone is saying there is any significant gain here. I'm just trying to figure out whether or not we're dodging the bullet in terms of pilot staffing. This isn't pretty, and I'm acutely aware of the deliveries from Brazil and Canada, but everyone is also acutely aware that noone really knew how the DC-9 story was going to end, pre and post-merger. As you said, we have parked many DC-9's, but so far we haven't parked any pilots, and it doesn't look like the DC-9/MD-90 transaction will cause any displacements. That's all I'm looking at right now.

Not to mention look at the destinations at any of the airports. The MD-90s are doing Airbus and 757 routes. The 175s and CRJ-900/700s are flying to all the old DC9 destinations. I agree the MD90s certainly aren't DC9 replacements.

What's there to take the wrong way? I agree: the replacement for the DC-9 has been the Embraer and CRJ. Pre-merger, this was a really bad scenario in the making, and post-merger the question remains open as to whether the airline can sustain all the pilots we brought in to the merger. Whatever form it takes, whether 747's flying more, 777 LR's, 757/767/MD88 returning from the desert, or MD-90's, my first concern is whetehr there is enough mainline flying for the mainline pilots.

This is not to say there isn't a shell game going on, or that we're not shifting growth to the large RJ's, or that it isn't total [deleted], but this is a different point than asking whether the MD-90 transaction amounts to a loss of seats or not.