![]() |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 637831)
I disagree 100%. This management and union team KNOW that doing that would cost more money that it could ever possibly save.
Add to that, the union has a 100 seat plan that many in the company agree with. Do not give up on that. Ever! |
Everyone is getting wrapped up in pay rates. The hourly pay rate is just one part of the total cost of a labor contract. The only way we will get those planes back from DCI is if the cost of our labor contract is competitive with the DCI cost. Since 9/11 DALPA's workers have become much more efficient and our productivity is way up compared to when the DCI contracts were written. As Bar and ACL have pointed out there are several other costs associated with DCI that is making them more expensive and making us more attractive. When the cost of our contract for that segment is a better deal than DCI, then we will have it.
|
Originally Posted by Eric Stratton
(Post 638021)
Correct, but tsquare was asking if there really were pilots out there that believed out sourcing was ok. To think that all pilots are against out sourcing is naive at best.
Yeah, tell me about it. Those "me, me, me" guys suck. |
Originally Posted by Eric Stratton
(Post 638025)
I agree with this but don't you guys have scope that limits the number of 70 seaters? I was told that you are up against that number right now so if you shrink how can they get more 70 seaters? Am I wrong on this?
Your scope also prevents 195 at the regionals so it is up to management if you get them or not. Those cannot be flown by others unless you guys let them. |
Originally Posted by satchip
(Post 638045)
Everyone is getting wrapped up in pay rates. The hourly pay rate is just one part of the total cost of a labor contract. The only way we will get those planes back from DCI is if the cost of our labor contract is competitive with the DCI cost. Since 9/11 DALPA's workers have become much more efficient and our productivity is way up compared to when the DCI contracts were written. As Bar and ACL have pointed out there are several other costs associated with DCI that is making them more expensive and making us more attractive. When the cost of our contract for that segment is a better deal than DCI, then we will have it.
|
Originally Posted by FlyingViking
(Post 638052)
Unless the DCI carriers have pilots willing to work for less than minimum wage, your suggestion would be fair enough. I think we all know....
|
Originally Posted by pilotc90a
(Post 637971)
It is my understanding that it was a management attempt to restructure airline pay scales by offering the pilots still on the property the same rates they were currently flying, but pay any new hires a lower rate for flying the same aircraft/routes etc.
The current pilots jumped at it since it wasn't their pay being affected. The new hires eventually came to resent the attitude of "I got mine" and started a great deal of internal dissension. It always goes back to management tactics of divide and conquer |
Originally Posted by nwaf16dude
(Post 638073)
B scale was Bob Crandall's idea at American. It started in the early 80's after deregulation. To say that current pilots jumped at it is not accurate. United guys went on strike to try to stop it. There wasn't one at either Delta or Northwest until both companies threatened bankruptcy. Yes, all three groups eventually allowed it to happen, but neither group "jumped" at the opportunity. The Northwest strike in 98 was mostly about getting rid of the B scale.
Who were those men with, ahhh... fortitude. And where did they go? :rolleyes: |
ACL65: Told you so ... .
ATLANTA (AP) -- A federal appeals court has upheld a preliminary injunction barring Delta Air Lines Inc., the world's biggest airline operator, from terminating a regional flying contract with Mesa Air Group Inc. subsidiary Freedom Airlines. Phoenix-based Mesa had said that the termination of the contract, if successful, would cripple its airline. Mesa said last year that the contract amounted to $20 million in monthly revenue for the parent company, or about 20 percent of its total sales for 2007. Mesa won a preliminary court injunction from the federal district court in Atlanta to block the contract termination, and the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, also in Atlanta, affirmed that decision Wednesday. This is bad news for Delta's unilateral ability to restructure DCI and bad news for us as it adds pressure to work out 2 for 1 deals and other agreements which give Delta flying away to achieve DCI changes by mutual agreement with the vendors. Mesa stick might be worth a day trade tomorrow, although this is just arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. RJET netted 64% last week. The savy computer traders will surely jump on this tidbit in the morning. The deal will be that the stock is low low to begin with. Already up 30% in after hours trading. |
Bar;
Fact is that Mesa will be gone in three years tops. We have discussed this, and Whitehurst killed DAL's case, plain and simple. As for the other DCI agreements, they start tapering in a few years. The 50 seat flying will go away either way. The 76 seat flying is capped, and if we sell it we are just pain stupid. I do not care what the carrot is this time. If we can not learn from how bad we got slapped in the last decade, we deserve everything we have coming. What is the saying,? "Screw me once shame on you, screw me twice shame on me." |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:05 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands