Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
04-29-2011 | 06:13 PM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
Its amazing that they have half the employees per airplane,yet manage to move their metal just as good or better than Delta and get higher scores for customer service.
In summary:
1) Fewer people to accomplish the same work. In every department.
2) Lower MX costs due to fleet simplification.
3) Lower training costs due to fleet simplification.
4) Lower Executive pay
5) Higher Daily utilization per plane.
6) Higher revenue by selling 80%+ tickets on thier own website.
Anything else?
In summary:
1) Fewer people to accomplish the same work. In every department.
2) Lower MX costs due to fleet simplification.
3) Lower training costs due to fleet simplification.
4) Lower Executive pay
5) Higher Daily utilization per plane.
6) Higher revenue by selling 80%+ tickets on thier own website.
Anything else?
A few things that make it easier for them but are not inclusive. 1) Less Debt load which equates to less debt service, or in layman's terms, less interest paid, 2) They work more block hrs per pilot than we do, and fly less credit. I suggest looking at the MIT Website website: Airline Data Project
and here is one that offers comparitive analysis:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...0Summary09.htm
Here is a direct wage one that shows the LUV pilots making more but you need to look at block per pilot as well:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...0PERSONNEL.htm
This one is a good start, because it gives equivalent pilots for equal block.
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...ity%202009.htm
Here is the block per pilot breakdown:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...er%20Month.htm
Passengers per pilot:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...Equivalent.htm
I will keep this simple as you just kicked the bee hive again!
ALPA could recapture the flying at the majors and represent the regional pilots interests. It requires the mainline pilots accepting that the regional ALPA members are part of their trade and when the flying is recaptured, they do not just step on their fellow ALPA brother or sister, but find a solution that benefits these pilots that is better than the street. In a word, Unity. If we all cannot see that, we are doomed from the start.
and here is one that offers comparitive analysis:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...0Summary09.htm
Here is a direct wage one that shows the LUV pilots making more but you need to look at block per pilot as well:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...0PERSONNEL.htm
This one is a good start, because it gives equivalent pilots for equal block.
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...ity%202009.htm
Here is the block per pilot breakdown:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...er%20Month.htm
Passengers per pilot:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...Equivalent.htm
I will keep this simple as you just kicked the bee hive again!
ALPA could recapture the flying at the majors and represent the regional pilots interests. It requires the mainline pilots accepting that the regional ALPA members are part of their trade and when the flying is recaptured, they do not just step on their fellow ALPA brother or sister, but find a solution that benefits these pilots that is better than the street. In a word, Unity. If we all cannot see that, we are doomed from the start.
04-29-2011 | 06:40 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,070
Likes: 1
From: Urban chicken rancher.
Sure here goes:
I understand the need for a place that has five or six conference rooms available. Watching the meetings first hand I understand the size and scope of what is involved, and it is no small task. The last Regular Meeting had 31 Reps, 4 Officers, 5-7 support staff, 3-4 lawyers, 4, negotiators, the chairman of almost every committee, a few line pilot on lookers, new reps (5) and a countless amount of other people that were giving presentations. You have drafting committees every day, and those are three to four rooms for the three to four breakout groups of Reps, you need an area to provide for lunch, and a main conference room that is wired for audio and visual, as well as lockable for closed session. You need to bring your own wi-fi capability, and wireless printing hardware and software for the admins to print the resolutions up to pass out so everyone has the same data in front of them to vote on, you need power outlets for at least 60 people to power their laptops in for 10 hrs a day, you need a place that the reps can focus on their issues of interest away from the very timed meeting day (hospitality suite) and you need rooms for all of the people that need em; probably close to 60 or so a night if it is not in Atlanta.
If it is a major meeting even the Atlanta personnel will stay a few nights as these things start at 0730 and run to well after six, then close to midnight discussing the way everyone is going to vote.
Point is that this is no junior league organization, and it does take a ton of money to run. I have always argued that we could do a little better in cost, but remember that many of those rates have internet, tax, food etc thrown in since we get comped this and that on some meetings.
Could we do better in the way of cost?, maybe but before we shot em, go ask what deals we got on the W last year. We got a killer rate because we booked a cancellation of a conference. We search for the deals. The food in the suite is average; hot dogs, burgers, etc, nothing fancy. Beer is free and there is a lot of that though.
I was floored at the cost of some of this stuff, but when I had it explained to be by our Tres, saw a bunch of meetings, witnessed our reps trying to save money not take money from the pilots, and overall acting very frugal, I began to understand that it is not an excess of a few, but the shear scope of our union's operation that costs money.
Yes, the hotel near the airport is generally a lot cheaper, but there are reasons to not have it there for a five or six day meeting. These places will also ding you on extra conference rooms etc, and when you tally all of that up, it get more expensive real quick. Also, the meetings at the airport in that report are generally one day special meetings that do not require anything but one room, reps rooms only and no meals and extra space that a long Regular Meeting does.
We can do better, but not to the level you think, they really do a good job at this. Maybe the crew hotels would be a good idea, but they would have to have four small conference rooms, and one large on for five days.
I understand the need for a place that has five or six conference rooms available. Watching the meetings first hand I understand the size and scope of what is involved, and it is no small task. The last Regular Meeting had 31 Reps, 4 Officers, 5-7 support staff, 3-4 lawyers, 4, negotiators, the chairman of almost every committee, a few line pilot on lookers, new reps (5) and a countless amount of other people that were giving presentations. You have drafting committees every day, and those are three to four rooms for the three to four breakout groups of Reps, you need an area to provide for lunch, and a main conference room that is wired for audio and visual, as well as lockable for closed session. You need to bring your own wi-fi capability, and wireless printing hardware and software for the admins to print the resolutions up to pass out so everyone has the same data in front of them to vote on, you need power outlets for at least 60 people to power their laptops in for 10 hrs a day, you need a place that the reps can focus on their issues of interest away from the very timed meeting day (hospitality suite) and you need rooms for all of the people that need em; probably close to 60 or so a night if it is not in Atlanta.
If it is a major meeting even the Atlanta personnel will stay a few nights as these things start at 0730 and run to well after six, then close to midnight discussing the way everyone is going to vote.
Point is that this is no junior league organization, and it does take a ton of money to run. I have always argued that we could do a little better in cost, but remember that many of those rates have internet, tax, food etc thrown in since we get comped this and that on some meetings.
Could we do better in the way of cost?, maybe but before we shot em, go ask what deals we got on the W last year. We got a killer rate because we booked a cancellation of a conference. We search for the deals. The food in the suite is average; hot dogs, burgers, etc, nothing fancy. Beer is free and there is a lot of that though.
I was floored at the cost of some of this stuff, but when I had it explained to be by our Tres, saw a bunch of meetings, witnessed our reps trying to save money not take money from the pilots, and overall acting very frugal, I began to understand that it is not an excess of a few, but the shear scope of our union's operation that costs money.
Yes, the hotel near the airport is generally a lot cheaper, but there are reasons to not have it there for a five or six day meeting. These places will also ding you on extra conference rooms etc, and when you tally all of that up, it get more expensive real quick. Also, the meetings at the airport in that report are generally one day special meetings that do not require anything but one room, reps rooms only and no meals and extra space that a long Regular Meeting does.
We can do better, but not to the level you think, they really do a good job at this. Maybe the crew hotels would be a good idea, but they would have to have four small conference rooms, and one large on for five days.
But here's the rub, we are paying them to represent us. No right-thinking airline pilot would spend $175 a day to fly the line. Here's what I propose: I support ALPA but based on what I know so far with their expenditures, this is not good. I don't begrudge a guy having a few drinks and staying in a nice hotel. But, their constituents are staying in lesser hotels and living on $30 a day. That's my issue. It's the perception. Might not be the reality, but its the perception. And based on what I read on the financials, it stinks.
04-29-2011 | 06:43 PM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
First, I don't think it's right that they are using dues money to buy any booze. But, I don't think anyone would have even noticed if they were actually getting results.
Hell, I'll buy the keg for the first meeting following a solid scope plan, and compensation somewhere in the same galaxy as SWA.
And I'm not sure why anyone on fpl should getting anything more than line per diem.
But, like I said, they brought this microscope to the fight due mostly to a lack of results. We (the avg dal pilot) are not in the habit of handing out free lunches when our per diem barely pays for our own.
Hell, I'll buy the keg for the first meeting following a solid scope plan, and compensation somewhere in the same galaxy as SWA.
And I'm not sure why anyone on fpl should getting anything more than line per diem.
But, like I said, they brought this microscope to the fight due mostly to a lack of results. We (the avg dal pilot) are not in the habit of handing out free lunches when our per diem barely pays for our own.
Funny, I wrote an almost word for word post, but then thought it was too emotional. There have been some results - SOT, some papers written about various topics, but I think your point is tangible, real, no kidding strategic results that benefit Delta pilots.
04-29-2011 | 06:53 PM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
A few things that make it easier for them but are not inclusive. 1) Less Debt load which equates to less debt service, or in layman's terms, less interest paid, 2) They work more block hrs per pilot than we do, and fly less credit. I suggest looking at the MIT Website website: Airline Data Project
and here is one that offers comparitive analysis:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...0Summary09.htm
Here is a direct wage one that shows the LUV pilots making more but you need to look at block per pilot as well:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...0PERSONNEL.htm
This one is a good start, because it gives equivalent pilots for equal block.
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...ity%202009.htm
Here is the block per pilot breakdown:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...er%20Month.htm
Passengers per pilot:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...Equivalent.htm
I will keep this simple as you just kicked the bee hive again!
ALPA could recapture the flying at the majors and represent the regional pilots interests. It requires the mainline pilots accepting that the regional ALPA members are part of their trade and when the flying is recaptured, they do not just step on their fellow ALPA brother or sister, but find a solution that benefits these pilots that is better than the street. In a word, Unity. If we all cannot see that, we are doomed from the start.
and here is one that offers comparitive analysis:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...0Summary09.htm
Here is a direct wage one that shows the LUV pilots making more but you need to look at block per pilot as well:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...0PERSONNEL.htm
This one is a good start, because it gives equivalent pilots for equal block.
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...ity%202009.htm
Here is the block per pilot breakdown:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...er%20Month.htm
Passengers per pilot:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...Equivalent.htm
I will keep this simple as you just kicked the bee hive again!
ALPA could recapture the flying at the majors and represent the regional pilots interests. It requires the mainline pilots accepting that the regional ALPA members are part of their trade and when the flying is recaptured, they do not just step on their fellow ALPA brother or sister, but find a solution that benefits these pilots that is better than the street. In a word, Unity. If we all cannot see that, we are doomed from the start.
ACL;
I agree completely with your last paragraph. But if actions speak louder than words, what do the actions of DALPA say about their embracing of unity. The way they handled compass (except for the flow up which can be negotiated away) was shameful and atrocious. It is all I need to see to have proof that scope recapture is NOT part of the gameplan - if there is one.
04-29-2011 | 07:27 PM
At home on the maddog!
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,874
Likes: 0
From: Retired (mandatory age 65)
A few things that make it easier for them but are not inclusive. 1) Less Debt load which equates to less debt service, or in layman's terms, less interest paid, 2) They work more block hrs per pilot than we do, and fly less credit. I suggest looking at the MIT Website website: Airline Data Project
and here is one that offers comparitive analysis:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...0Summary09.htm
Here is a direct wage one that shows the LUV pilots making more but you need to look at block per pilot as well:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...0PERSONNEL.htm
This one is a good start, because it gives equivalent pilots for equal block.
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...ity%202009.htm
Here is the block per pilot breakdown:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...er%20Month.htm
Passengers per pilot:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...Equivalent.htm
and here is one that offers comparitive analysis:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...0Summary09.htm
Here is a direct wage one that shows the LUV pilots making more but you need to look at block per pilot as well:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...0PERSONNEL.htm
This one is a good start, because it gives equivalent pilots for equal block.
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...ity%202009.htm
Here is the block per pilot breakdown:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...er%20Month.htm
Passengers per pilot:
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...Equivalent.htm
And I didn't even look at the links you provided. They may paint a relevant picture, and then again they may not. You can show just about anything you want with selective statistics. The MIT guy is Swelbar. Here's an excerpt from his bio on his blog. I wouldn't necessarily put too much stock in what he has to say as he could very well have an agenda behind it and I think his credibility is suspect:
"Prior to accepting his research position at MIT, Swelbar spent 25 years in the consulting world with a focus on airline labor cost restructuring, regulatory issues governing air transport, communication strategy and support, and air service development on behalf of airports and communities."
04-29-2011 | 07:36 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Oh, I guess SWA pilots work harder than us. That is why they are paid more. OK. Back to the salt mine.
04-29-2011 | 09:22 PM
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
Carl
04-29-2011 | 09:30 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
I don't disagree with your post at all but I will point out 1 fleet is a heck of a risk to run after the FAA generated AD debacle on the 80 series that AMR and DAL endured in 07.
Say the 737 has a design flaw that grounds them all. We lose 11% of our fleet or 14% of our domestic fleet (using 1am math mind you). SWA would lose 100%.
They also mentioned during the merger that the cost efficiencies found in a single fleet when it comes to maintenance and so forth is already maxed out given the large size of the existing MD, Airbus and Boeing fleets.
However, there are still plenty of inefficiencies including pilot training and cost.
But I agree with your post.
Say the 737 has a design flaw that grounds them all. We lose 11% of our fleet or 14% of our domestic fleet (using 1am math mind you). SWA would lose 100%.
They also mentioned during the merger that the cost efficiencies found in a single fleet when it comes to maintenance and so forth is already maxed out given the large size of the existing MD, Airbus and Boeing fleets.
However, there are still plenty of inefficiencies including pilot training and cost.
But I agree with your post.
04-29-2011 | 09:39 PM
Da Hudge
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
I don't disagree with your post at all but I will point out 1 fleet is a heck of a risk to run after the FAA generated AD debacle on the 80 series that AMR and DAL endured in 07.
Say the 737 has a design flaw that grounds them all. We lose 11% of our fleet or 14% of our domestic fleet (using 1am math mind you). SWA would lose 100%.
They also mentioned during the merger that the cost efficiencies found in a single fleet when it comes to maintenance and so forth is already maxed out given the large size of the existing MD, Airbus and Boeing fleets.
However, there are still plenty of inefficiencies including pilot training and cost.
But I agree with your post.
Say the 737 has a design flaw that grounds them all. We lose 11% of our fleet or 14% of our domestic fleet (using 1am math mind you). SWA would lose 100%.
They also mentioned during the merger that the cost efficiencies found in a single fleet when it comes to maintenance and so forth is already maxed out given the large size of the existing MD, Airbus and Boeing fleets.
However, there are still plenty of inefficiencies including pilot training and cost.
But I agree with your post.
Take that for what it's worth, because with the flip flop on numbers we've all heard over the years (how much more cost effective a CRJ-200 was over a turboprop, frequency trumps all)... it comes down to the basic statistics lesson of "if you want the numbers to say it, you can make them say it."
04-29-2011 | 11:12 PM
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
It screws junior pilots... again. If you want to fly trips in my base, put in a WS or GS, and take your chances. OR... bid to my base... Otherwise, this thing is ripe for abuse... I would much rather that the ASSociation actually do something worthwhile and fix the damned reserve system. This is a bandaid on a sucking chest wound.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
