Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
06-02-2011 | 05:27 AM
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,263
Likes: 105
From: DAL 330
The last time I went through MSP, this airplane flew a lot of passengers out of Gate 3, from there to Seattle, Washington, with the help of Delta agents, ground crew, and Delta everything else. I've flown this route before with DC-10's and 757's. What is this?
THIS IS A SCOPE FAILURE AND OFFENDS ME JUST AS MUCH AS RAH.
IMO, our scope is being eroded from ALL sides.
Why is this not being addressed?
THIS IS A SCOPE FAILURE AND OFFENDS ME JUST AS MUCH AS RAH.
IMO, our scope is being eroded from ALL sides.
Why is this not being addressed?
New,
Its all important and should all be looked at and addressed. The airline industry is changing at an revolutionary vice an evolutionary rate.
Our contract, specifically the Scope section, has not kept up with industry changes and is clearly inadequate in providing the protections for the DAL pilots that it was intended to provide.
Too many loopholes, exceptions, or just plain "That is not a Scope violation." We need to tighten it up in all regards. DCI, Code sharing, Joint Ventures are all important. If the ticket says Delta than we as Delta Pilots have a vested interest in what pilot group is doing the flying.
Scoop
06-02-2011 | 05:37 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,619
Likes: 0
There is a graph called the "S-Curve" that shows the relationship between market share and revenue in a particular route. The natural assumption would be that if you had 20% market share you would get 20% of the revenue and if you had 50% market share you would get 50% of the revenue. Actually, if you have a low market share, like 20% you might only get 15% of the market revenue. If you have 50% market share you might be getting 60% of the revenue. This is because high fare business travelers like the flexibility that a broad schedule gives them. When you code share, you can increase your effective market share to business travelers and you will get more than your share of revenue.
So while Alaska flies some of our code on their metal, we also fly their code on our metal. The net effect is that business travelers see a larger market share and we both capture more than our share of revenue. Busting up the code share would not stop us from flying to SEA and would not stop Alaska from flying to MSP, it's just we would all make less money. I want Delta to make more money because I want them to pay me more money.
By the way, Delta provides ground services to many airlines that we do not code share with. They also provide maintenance services at the TOC in Atlanta. They make a lot of money doing that.
06-02-2011 | 05:47 AM
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Good post Alpha.
Maybe what some pilots see is that Alaska and Delta have chosen to optimize where they fly and what they fly. We have larger airplanes with better seat mile costs and cargo capability over longer routes. We use that strength. Alaska has an operation well suited to do our Portland, Seattle and LAX flying.
Along with your S curve, there's also the fact that we are removing a competitor from the market and making a partner. Both partners have the common interest of maximizing revenue.
What we wish to avoid is what MidWest airlines did. It decided to outsource it's entire airline.
We would hope Delta would chose to be a successful competitor. We are putting up a fight in the New York market and Africa's been a winner from what I hear.
Wish we could "win" someplace a little nicer, like the Pacific Northwest, Hawaii and civilized Europe instead of places where a skeeter can kill a guy.
Maybe what some pilots see is that Alaska and Delta have chosen to optimize where they fly and what they fly. We have larger airplanes with better seat mile costs and cargo capability over longer routes. We use that strength. Alaska has an operation well suited to do our Portland, Seattle and LAX flying.
Along with your S curve, there's also the fact that we are removing a competitor from the market and making a partner. Both partners have the common interest of maximizing revenue.
What we wish to avoid is what MidWest airlines did. It decided to outsource it's entire airline.
We would hope Delta would chose to be a successful competitor. We are putting up a fight in the New York market and Africa's been a winner from what I hear.
Wish we could "win" someplace a little nicer, like the Pacific Northwest, Hawaii and civilized Europe instead of places where a skeeter can kill a guy.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 06-02-2011 at 05:58 AM.
06-02-2011 | 06:05 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
From: B744 F/O
Carl;
Looking zt historical trends yes, ALPA gets larger gains in section six that SWAPA has. ALK is ALPA, HI is ALPA. DAL has not had a section six since 2001 where ALPA obtained the largest gains of any organized pilot group. My position is ALPA must get it right to survive, but they have a good history of it outside of CH11. Some people just cannot stand to admit that we have not seen a successful section six in ten years. Nor has CAL, AMR, UAL, etc.
Looking zt historical trends yes, ALPA gets larger gains in section six that SWAPA has. ALK is ALPA, HI is ALPA. DAL has not had a section six since 2001 where ALPA obtained the largest gains of any organized pilot group. My position is ALPA must get it right to survive, but they have a good history of it outside of CH11. Some people just cannot stand to admit that we have not seen a successful section six in ten years. Nor has CAL, AMR, UAL, etc.
ACL, some people have longer memories. When I was hired, 1987, we lived comfortably on a 75 hour month (max allowed). Had a pension, fully paid for med plans, per diem that covered layover expenses, and no RJ's. Now lets look at where we are now.
Jim
06-02-2011 | 06:08 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
..................Deleted
06-02-2011 | 06:58 AM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
ACL;
I am just 1 of 12500 pilots. I am a reasonable guy despite my inability to avoid taking the random snipe when it is offered on a silver platter. I am going to guess that DAL has about 20% of the pilots completed disgusted (based on DPA cards), 20% of change from within, and 60% that will do whatever DALPA says. YMMV.
Scope was sold. Period. ALPA used it as a bargaining credit and told us that it was good for us. I am not sure that they even tried to use anything else as a bargaining credit...big picture.
We find ourselves in a position moving toward section 6 where (theoretically) we have limited leverage because we already used our bargaining credits to get C2K payrates - which ALPA (apologists?) say contributed to our bankruptcy.
We gave these payrates back in 2 LOAs pre-bankruptcy...I say that is an overdue loan (but I'm 1 guy). We woke up after a looong hangover and now we want some scope recature coupled with payrates etc. that reflect C2K + inflation or something similar.
1. We have scaled back the atlantic and AF/KLM is flying some of our trips as connections.
2. AK is flying the heart of our west coast
3. skywest and RAH arent being beaten back by our in-house union - giving them the green light to further expand.
4. A national officer tells us we can't strike over scope - which may or may not be true, but the implication is incompetence.
5. ALPA Nat'l tells us our greatest threat is Emirates.
We are darn near the cheapest yet most productive pilots in our worldwide neighborhood, yet we keep getting kicked in the nutz. Where is our strategic planning, where is our leverage. If it exists, I am not seeing it and believe me I try.
I have said that I believe in some constructive engagement when it is our shared interest, but in reality, what I see is a Lorenzo style shell game being run by colluding managements and our union is far too slow or stupid to see what is happening right in front of its face; dont see the forest for the trees.
Please help me see how ALPA is the winning team. Please, please, please.
I am just 1 of 12500 pilots. I am a reasonable guy despite my inability to avoid taking the random snipe when it is offered on a silver platter. I am going to guess that DAL has about 20% of the pilots completed disgusted (based on DPA cards), 20% of change from within, and 60% that will do whatever DALPA says. YMMV.
Scope was sold. Period. ALPA used it as a bargaining credit and told us that it was good for us. I am not sure that they even tried to use anything else as a bargaining credit...big picture.
We find ourselves in a position moving toward section 6 where (theoretically) we have limited leverage because we already used our bargaining credits to get C2K payrates - which ALPA (apologists?) say contributed to our bankruptcy.
We gave these payrates back in 2 LOAs pre-bankruptcy...I say that is an overdue loan (but I'm 1 guy). We woke up after a looong hangover and now we want some scope recature coupled with payrates etc. that reflect C2K + inflation or something similar.
1. We have scaled back the atlantic and AF/KLM is flying some of our trips as connections.
2. AK is flying the heart of our west coast
3. skywest and RAH arent being beaten back by our in-house union - giving them the green light to further expand.
4. A national officer tells us we can't strike over scope - which may or may not be true, but the implication is incompetence.
5. ALPA Nat'l tells us our greatest threat is Emirates.
We are darn near the cheapest yet most productive pilots in our worldwide neighborhood, yet we keep getting kicked in the nutz. Where is our strategic planning, where is our leverage. If it exists, I am not seeing it and believe me I try.
I have said that I believe in some constructive engagement when it is our shared interest, but in reality, what I see is a Lorenzo style shell game being run by colluding managements and our union is far too slow or stupid to see what is happening right in front of its face; dont see the forest for the trees.
Please help me see how ALPA is the winning team. Please, please, please.
2) Realize where we were in error and fix it, demand nothing less from your reps. If they are not delivering, Recall them, now not later.
3) Scope is key, that I agree, and we all need to realize that.
4) Anyone who says C2K was the "reason" for CH11 is full of it, but it did not help when our margins were cut to nil by the LCC LUV. (They are a major reason we are where we are, and never forget that)
5) Using your percentages of irritated pilots, I suggest, yet, again a course of action. DPA cannot, and will not get that other 20% until something like a horrible C2012 is presented, and then they are looking at a card drive, de-certification vote, negotiations, and then a contract in maybe 2020. That is not acceptable to me, and not to many pilots. That is why these 2700 pilots need to for an alliance and reengage in the ALPA process to effect change now. Continuing the divide will really hurt all of our careers. You still have time to effect change in a few council elections this fall if you so choose, and I recommend that course of action.
6) I am less than pleased with many things that are currently on-going. I want a specific result, but know enough to know, that time really is of the essence and walking away from the current process is not the action that will lead to the best results for this group. If is time consuming and frustrating; at times, but necessary. To get change we all want, takes work, and not an forum. I wish it were that way, but it is not. Having others do the heavy lifting seems ideal in though, but far from ideal in action. Attend a LEC meeting, get the facts, bother your reps, demand answers, and if they are not what you like, initiate the change you want. It does not matter who's name is on the door, it is the people that are behind that door that matter.
06-02-2011 | 07:02 AM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
Today, Delta is flying 3 757-300's and 2 757's from MSP to SEA. Some of those aircraft will fly with the Alaska code on it. If you are going to have a code share then both sides are going to have to have some benefits. Why would Alaska management or the Alaska pilots ever agree to a deal where Delta gets to "own" flying in their hubs, but Alaska doesn't get to "own" flying in their hubs.
Using your analogy, the Alaska pilots should be offended by all those A-330's and 767's flying out of their hub in Seattle.
If Delta did not have a code share, what is the chance that Alaska would not fly from MSP to SEA? We don't have a code share with American and I see them flying from MSP to DFW, ORD, and other hubs. Is that a Scope Failure?
Using your analogy, the Alaska pilots should be offended by all those A-330's and 767's flying out of their hub in Seattle.
If Delta did not have a code share, what is the chance that Alaska would not fly from MSP to SEA? We don't have a code share with American and I see them flying from MSP to DFW, ORD, and other hubs. Is that a Scope Failure?
Routes like SEA-HNL SEA-OGG, SEA-BOS were added the day after we discontinued our service. ( I do not have my data in front of me, but they took over about 10-12 routes in LAX as well)
06-02-2011 | 07:07 AM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
True, but if we could not fly Alaska's code on OUR flights, then maybe we would not have 5 flights per day to SEA or maybe we would downgauge the flights. I really doubt that Alaska would allow us to fly with their code without reciprocation.
There is a graph called the "S-Curve" that shows the relationship between market share and revenue in a particular route. The natural assumption would be that if you had 20% market share you would get 20% of the revenue and if you had 50% market share you would get 50% of the revenue. Actually, if you have a low market share, like 20% you might only get 15% of the market revenue. If you have 50% market share you might be getting 60% of the revenue. This is because high fare business travelers like the flexibility that a broad schedule gives them. When you code share, you can increase your effective market share to business travelers and you will get more than your share of revenue.
So while Alaska flies some of our code on their metal, we also fly their code on our metal. The net effect is that business travelers see a larger market share and we both capture more than our share of revenue. Busting up the code share would not stop us from flying to SEA and would not stop Alaska from flying to MSP, it's just we would all make less money. I want Delta to make more money because I want them to pay me more money.
By the way, Delta provides ground services to many airlines that we do not code share with. They also provide maintenance services at the TOC in Atlanta. They make a lot of money doing that.
There is a graph called the "S-Curve" that shows the relationship between market share and revenue in a particular route. The natural assumption would be that if you had 20% market share you would get 20% of the revenue and if you had 50% market share you would get 50% of the revenue. Actually, if you have a low market share, like 20% you might only get 15% of the market revenue. If you have 50% market share you might be getting 60% of the revenue. This is because high fare business travelers like the flexibility that a broad schedule gives them. When you code share, you can increase your effective market share to business travelers and you will get more than your share of revenue.
So while Alaska flies some of our code on their metal, we also fly their code on our metal. The net effect is that business travelers see a larger market share and we both capture more than our share of revenue. Busting up the code share would not stop us from flying to SEA and would not stop Alaska from flying to MSP, it's just we would all make less money. I want Delta to make more money because I want them to pay me more money.
By the way, Delta provides ground services to many airlines that we do not code share with. They also provide maintenance services at the TOC in Atlanta. They make a lot of money doing that.
It may not be that they are "stealing" our flying, but future growth opportunities are definitely leveled out.
Wrt to our service to Kiev, AMM, CAI, et al, I suspect that some of these secondary markets have been cut to allow AF to offer CDG connections and keep the large gauge metal full in this double dip.
06-02-2011 | 07:07 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,462
Likes: 0
And the reverse of that is also true; we gain a lot more from them than many realize.
06-02-2011 | 07:12 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,971
Likes: 0
From: Kickin’ Back
Alfa,
I know I have a purely layman (don't have the big picture) point of view but I find it suspicious when we (Delta) abandon two routes (SEA-OGG and PDX-HNL) and Alaska starts them up within a day or days........ What makes these routes unprofitable for Delta but profitable for Alaska? It just looks funny.....
It just looks like Alaska has all the marbles in this case. The argument that we fly to their hubs can be turned around and I'll say no, they fly to our, much bigger, hubs in ATL, MSP etc. How long has Alaska been doing this flights (SEA-ATL)? As a guess I'd say since we have started codesharing with them....
Denny
I know I have a purely layman (don't have the big picture) point of view but I find it suspicious when we (Delta) abandon two routes (SEA-OGG and PDX-HNL) and Alaska starts them up within a day or days........ What makes these routes unprofitable for Delta but profitable for Alaska? It just looks funny.....
It just looks like Alaska has all the marbles in this case. The argument that we fly to their hubs can be turned around and I'll say no, they fly to our, much bigger, hubs in ATL, MSP etc. How long has Alaska been doing this flights (SEA-ATL)? As a guess I'd say since we have started codesharing with them....
Denny
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
