|
Originally Posted by Delta1067
(Post 1160279)
Raw bucket group 3 now starts at 129 for narrow body. Me like
|
Originally Posted by Flamer
(Post 1160293)
Most posts are indicating we will not seek scope recapture, but rather another "small" increase in scope allowances and outsourcing.
I'll vote no to anything with worse scope than current. Currently DAL has unlimited off-list: 50 and below jets 70 and below turboprops JV flying (except with Skyteam transatlantic) Alaska Codeshare and other international codeshare AND 255 off-list 51-76 jets. Would would you agree or disagree that it would be a gain or loss in scope if: Capped and PERMANENTLY reduced (over a set timeframe) all 50 seat jets and no renewal permitted off-list 0 off-list future turborprop flying ALL JV flying required to be 50% DAL pilot EASK's/block hours/whatever metric), lookback average returned to 1 year instead of 3, with monthly financial penalties paid to the Delta Pilots when out of compliance. ALL codehares have time limits or cutoff points if the codeshare is a revenue deal Alaska codeshare is limited/reduced over time/ sunsetted completely. DAL can operate 1 more 51-76 seat RJ's off-list for every 2.5 50 seat jets that are removed from service, up to a limit of X airframes (say 50-100)? Is it a gain or loss.... ***DISCLAIMER***The above is NOT anyone's scope proposal(mine, company, or union), just a hypothetical question. Gotta go, I'll be interested to see what guys think later. |
Originally Posted by SFWB
(Post 1160465)
highest raw in MEM. 5 SC's. Worked everyday. Vacation Sunday. Another SC tomorrow morning. Ugh.
|
Originally Posted by padre2992
(Post 1160482)
Bucking Bar:
Certainly this contract is about more than pay. From what the Negotiator's Notepad and the Chairman's letter said, this is full Section 6, only expedited. Scope will most likely be part of it. I really don't see us making concessions in the area of scope though. There hasn't been anything from ALPA that makes me think they are considering any concessions. Isn't it hard to make that case when the company is making fairly good profits? acl65: You think 5, 5, 5, 5 will pass? I don't see that happening. Most guys I talk with are looking for double digits for the up front pay raise. That was the point of my previous posts regarding the comparison to SWA. As a minimum, shouldn't we get the Roger value of 11% (or close to it) up front? TheManager: Thanks for the welcome. Regarding reality, we all have our own ideas on that. Some of us have been through divorces, bankruptcies, foreclosures, etc. I have. And some have had it better. When the time comes for a vote, all I can say is choose what is best for you. I do not know Tomahawk 58, but have had friends tell me who they think a particular forum name is. One question for you: how is it that you post under the name TheManager, but the post is edited johnso29? Can other people edit our posts? Finally, 5% is way to small upfront and Rogers number of 11% seems extremely suspect and an inaccurate figure that "gets us even with SWA." I definitely want to him to show his work on that. The above does not matter if there is a scope sale. All becomes a mute point. |
"5-5-5-5?" Laughable.
I assume the OP meant "55-5-5." |
Originally Posted by PinnacleFO
(Post 1160524)
but I did buy a mega millions ticket today as well so maybe I will buy pinnacle
You'd make $24M a year on the payout or go for $462M cash option of which the Feds keep $115M to help run the government for 9 minutes and you get $346M. So say you take the $346M option and buy Pinnacle? What are you going to do with the remaining $346M? |
No I didn't say pinnacle was free. It just disappeared when I rounded.
|
Originally Posted by TheManager
(Post 1160548)
That I don't know. Always thought only the poster could edit, or perhaps of course, a moderator. Is johnso29 a mod?Disregard the Tomahawk 58 reference as it's insignificant.
Finally, 5% is way to small upfront and Rogers number of 11% seems extremely suspect and an inaccurate figure that "gets us even with SWA." I definitely want to him to show his work on that. The above does not matter if there is a scope sale. All becomes a mute point. I did edit his post, but only to show whom he quoted. I didn't edit any text. :) |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1160569)
The lottery is $640M.
You'd make $24M a year on the payout or go for $462M cash option of which the Feds keep $115M to help run the government for 9 minutes and you get $346M. So say you take the $346M option and buy Pinnacle? What are you going to do with the remaining $346M? Yikes - after I posted that it donned on how many TOS I violated. Sorry! But here was the source, before having the better judgement not to post the picture (click on at your own peril, boob from every angle shown, arguably there are three boobs in this picture) http://www.theonion.com/articles/sec...white-h,26541/ |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1160569)
The lottery is $640M.
You'd make $24M a year on the payout or go for $462M cash option of which the Feds keep $115M to help run the government for 9 minutes and you get $346M. So say you take the $346M option and buy Pinnacle? What are you going to do with the remaining $346M? Only problem is having to share with some other pesky winner(s) and of course finding a 7/11 that can handle my $176M transaction. Wouldn't be surprised to see Goldman or BoA getting in on this =P Also: scoping out "50 seats" will result in a whole lot of 49 seat rj's. They already carry 48/49 most of the winter anyway. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:54 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands