Airline Pilot Central Forums - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

BINGO!!! Winner! Winner!

When I was forloughed in 2002, we had over 10,500 pilots on property, after I came back and we started hiring again, we got down to 5700 and change. What happened to those nearly 5000 seats? It wasn't all from getting rid of the three holers, 727's, L1011's. Delta as a company was flying around the same amount. Where did they go? I think we all know.

And Yes, I would fly as a Captain on the CRJ-900/EMB-170-195, so don't go there AlfaRomeo.

His retort is would you do it as an FO? My answer is yes, if it has a DAL seniority number attached to it. I wasted 10 years in longevity because of this divide.

There are some here that think that scope limits those RJ's and if they were here we would have less large jets and more RJ's. A bigger loss of the higher paying jobs. My response it limit how many can fly on our ticket. We can do it for other airlines certificates we sure as heck can do it on ours.

Flying

06-09-2009 09:33 AM

So the UPS pilots at least postponed a furlough until April 10 by taking voluntary cutbacks, leaves, etc. Two-thirds participated... How would that go at DAL? Would our union be able to negotiate something like that before furloughs are announced?

Superpilot92

06-09-2009 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NWA320pilot (Post 625402)

I am in hopes for everyone's sake that no furloughs are coming...... But with that said given the current economy, bookings, pulldown of flying, retirements of the -200, etc. the probability looks to be increasing everyday. Not trying to be a pessimest just a realist.

I'm not arguing that point, what i am arguing is that there is a cost associated with keeping people on property as well as a cost to furlough. At some point, time and cost could exceed the cost of keeping those jobs on property but there is a pro vs con argument now unlike in previous times. Before the merger, flow, triggers, etc they could furlough first and think about it later. Now they have to think and weigh the options first before jumping which is a good thing. As of now they seem to just prefer being a little fat instead of dropping the F-bomb. Like i said nothings certain in this job and could change but i think we'll see more PIRPs offered before they start the CF of cutting pilots. If they do, then i'll may end up at Compass or Home Depot for a while while the company gets its ducks in a row or we start actually seeing the waves of retirements that ARE coming. Soon they'll be dropping like flies once the age 65 rule change has taken full effect.

Tomcat

06-09-2009 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 625416)

His retort is would you do it as an FO? My answer is yes, if it has a DAL seniority number attached to it.

Simply said, Yes! I could have flown one of these aircraft as an FO rather than be furloughed. If I was on furlough, I would have happily come back and fly it as a FO. That being said, my seniority would now allow me to hold a Captain seat on these aircraft and I would most certainly bid it. Currently I can hold the most junior seats on the MD88 as a Captain. I would rather have the quality of life with more seniority on a EMB-190/195, if it fell out the way I think it would. :cool:

I plan on bidding the DC-9 Captain seat if it is moved to ATL. Let's see, DC-9 or EMB-190/195? I'd go with the technology. Just my opinion.

TC

Superpilot92

06-09-2009 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 625414)

Also FWIW, I am only making a point in reference to DAL's last hiring cycle. We started hiring when we started a shift to international flying.

As for if DAL would be bigger? Yes, because those jets (76 seat jets ) would be here. I do not think that a 50 seat jet has the economics for the regionals much less the majors, but that is not our issues. DAL pays certain individuals tens of millions of dollars a year to put the right aircraft on a route. I am sure that if we had all of the flying here at DAL done by DALPA pilots they would find a way to make it work. Our current Scope just makes their job easier.
Find the lowest bidder and award the flying. It keeps everyone including DALPA off balance and fighting for the avail flying. That is not unionism as I understand it.

These large RJ's are bigger than a DC-9 and have three times the capability. There is no reason they should be at a B scale wage at the regional level. Plus, I want those CUN overnights that CPS does ;)

I agree with everything but CPS doesnt go to CUN.

slowplay

06-09-2009 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tomcat (Post 625413)

When I was forloughed in 2002, we had over 10,500 pilots on property, after I came back and we started hiring again, we got down to 5700 and change. What happened to those nearly 5000 seats? It wasn't all from getting rid of the three holers, 727's, L1011's. Delta as a company was flying around the same amount. Where did they go? I think we all know.

Not to be argumentative, but your numbers aren't correct. The most pilots we ever had on the seniority list was just over 10,200 (July 16, 2001). Out of that list only 8,200 were actively flying the line. Over 1000 were on disability, 400 in the new hire training pipeline (many of whom were furloughed without ever doing any line flying) and there was a substantial number on MLOA. The lowest we ever got was just under 6,200. During the time frame we're talking about there were 1060 pilots on furlough (1310 if you include 250 FMII that were recalled because of the no furlough clause), and 3000 pilots retired.

Superpilot92

06-09-2009 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 625434)

Would you fly it as an FO? If it's on our list, all those positions are Delta pilot positions. How about ACL, CLMP, or BAR? Ready to step back in time? (Not you TC, you already flew an antique!).

I would without hesitation :D, Those planes should absolutely be mainline aircraft. Like ACL said, getting more planes and pilot jobs on property is always going to be a good thing for all involved. The longevity divide caused by regionals and Majors only divides all pilot groups from working together. With ALPA representing the regionals and the majors at the same time there is always going to be a conflict of interest. How does ALPA fight for keeping jobs at mainline while also trying to protect jobs at the regionals? The only way to fix that divide is to eliminate the divide by flow agreements or bringing jobs back to mainline. IF all else fails ALPA shouldnt represent both sides of the fence.

Protecting and enhancing scope protects mainline jobs.

Tomcat

06-09-2009 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 625434)

Not the numbers that I saw on our Union website during this time, but I'll give you a nod and say you're correct!:) You say we lost 4000 pilots, I say actually with public math, 4700. Now, What happened to all that flying?

Just our of curiousity, since you're in the "know", of the 12,300 + pilots that are on our roster, how many are actually here?

I hope you enjoyed saying I was wrong as much as my wife does! :)

If anybody can cut a fellow pilot a break, someone just randomly say I'm right about something. I feel the need to be validated!!!!! :D

TC, lovin' life!

AAflyer

06-09-2009 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flying (Post 625422)

As a direct result of age 65. Wow, giving concessions so the senior guys can keep flying. Who would have thought.. Sorry for the thread drift.

AA

Superpilot92

06-09-2009 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AAflyer (Post 625443)

As a direct result of age 65. Wow, giving concessions so the senior guys can keep flying. Who would have thought.. Sorry for the thread drift.

AA

Actually its so the junior guys can keep flying, but the only reason why its an issue is because of the older senior guys not knowing how to retire :rolleyes:. Age 65 has screwed everyone but the 55+ guys who want to fly till they die :cool:

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:51 PM.

Page 807 of 20174

807

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page