|
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 1046648)
Who could not see this coming.
Sailingfun?:D Is this a quiz? |
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1046752)
The answer is clear, but it's too painful for some to admit.
Carl That's the problem. But it does not mean we need to replace the union. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1046726)
Know of any 76 seat jets at airlines that are not scope constrained? Me either.
Without the false economy of outsourcing, airlines choose the 737 and A320 as their narrow body domestic jets. Even JetBlue is reducing their E190 order book and stating Delta has a market for feed below our current 150'ish floor. Eventually the 76 seat market will be a 100 to 130 seat market as fuel prices dictate that the operational cost of the jet is divided up among more customers. Before I go back to the bunker, 50 seat limit on turboprops. Period. |
Originally Posted by buzzpat
(Post 1046766)
Hey guys, sorry to interrupt the flow here but, quick question. A buddy of mine asked today and I can't remember how it works.
If he flies a regular schedule in September, that includes a spillover trip at the end of the month, and bids reserve October, does he get paid for the spillover time above the reserve guarantee, does it credit his bank, or does it simply count towards the reserve guarantee in October? Thanks. The spillover time adjusts his reserve hours flown and adjusts the raw score |
Originally Posted by georgetg
(Post 1046753)
How about a small addition to Section 1
All Delta flights performed by pilots other than Delta seniority list pilots exist solely to provide feed for flights operated by Delta pilots. If we don't do that, what's to stop Delta from codesharing and placing pax on AA to go to DFW and UAL to go to IAD "because we wouldn't want to compete in those markets", the way we do with AS on the West Coast. Cheers George Its too simplistic. I can see around the corner on this and it would be a mgmt wet dream...open the floodgates. Especially international. It is a good concept tho. |
Delta LaGuardia Growth Bid Spurs Southwest to Demand More Slots for Rivals - Bloomberg
Delta LaGuardia Growth Bid Spurs Southwest to Demand More Slots for Rivals By Mary Jane Credeur - Aug 30, 2011 4:11 PM ET Southwest Airlines Co. (LUV) and other carriers objected to Delta Air Lines Inc. (DAL)’s efforts to expand at New York’s LaGuardia airport through a proposed swap of takeoff and landing slots with US Airways Group Inc. (LCC) The accord between Delta and US Airways calls for divesting 48 slots to smaller rivals, about 30 percent fewer than a previous plan that those two carriers walked away from last year. Dallas-based Southwest said in a filing that there is “no justification for such smaller divestitures.” The Department of Transportation should “seriously consider even larger carve-outs in light of the severe -- and permanent -- negative impact that the proposed transaction will have on competition,” Southwest said in a regulatory filing posted today on the agency website. JetBlue Airways Corp. (JBLU) and Virgin America Inc. also filed objections. The Airports Council International trade group based in Washington urged regulators to deny the proposal from Atlanta-based Delta and Tempe, Arizona-based US Airways, saying it would strip local airport authorities of control of their facilities. Last month U.S. regulators tentatively approved the deal, which would give Delta 132 more slot pairs at LaGuardia and control of about half the flights there. In exchange, US Airways would get 42 pairs at Washington Reagan National Airport. LaGuardia and National are so congested that they are under flight restrictions, meaning carriers must trade slots in order to grow. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1046776)
Our union's founder was proud to walk in the Labor Day Parade through New York. Is anyone walking this year?
That's the problem. But it does not mean we need to replace the union.
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
(Post 1046752)
It is a revealing post and Check is indeed a great guy. Many pilots probably feel this way, but MOST don't. But that's not the real issue IMO. Pilot opinion is built by data. Our union is the main source of data that used to be as reliable as it got. Now, our union just re-posts data given to them by management from the closed door meetings.
The fact we have any pilots at all that do not think of scope as the #1 priority is ALPA's fault. I'll bet there's not a single pilot who thinks cabotage is unimportant. Why? Because ALPA has done a good job giving us the information on the dangers. Why won't ALPA give out the same information on the dangers of scope erosion? It would do so much to galvanize opinion on scope and enhance unity, but ALPA refuses. Why is that Bar? Why not an all-out communications assault on scope erosion similar to cabotage? The answer is clear, but it's too painful for some to admit. Carl Carl |
You guys really like the word germain (or is it germane?) lately.
Perhaps Octoberfest on the mind? http://minnesotagal.files.wordpress....ktoberfest.jpg |
SWA management is doing why is in their best interest. I find them annoying.
If the government capitulates to them and JB... bleep those beeping bleepers in the government. By the way if you have to trade slots to grow, why doesn't SWA trade something we want? Like money? How about we lease slots... for a fortune. Tack on a tax on top of that, give it to lobbyist who can give it to congress. |
Sorry to interrupt, but I thought I'd stop in and provide this
http://wickedchopspoker.blogs.com/ph...xim_france.jpg as a thanks to the Delta crew that gave me a ride home (MCO-LAX) this morning. :D |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:54 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands