Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,263
Likes: 105
From: DAL 330
Guys,
Its really not that hard.
1. First stop with all the "He is senior he does not care about us/scope."
It does no good and divides us.
2. Hold the line where it is - 255 large RJs. Any more are flown by DAL Pilots.
3. $143/ Hour and $97/hour. That is the payrate that JetBlue pays on the E-190. We match that and maybe add a few bucks and it is an entry level Captain and FO seat.
4. If the company can't make a profit at that rate. TS. Figure it out or get new management that can. If Jetblue can get by with that rate then we can.
5. Furthermore lets slowly start raising the bar like ALPA and DALPA have been saying for years. I must admit I have not really thought this out fully yet, but if we match Jetblues rates hopefully other carriers will match us (pattern bargaining) and who knows, the 1500 hour rule (despite ALPAs efforts to water it down) might actually help us slowly raise industry rates.
If ALPA even asks us to allow more 70/76 seaters at DCI then they are not serious about raising the bar throughout the industry - in fact they would be impeding it by allowing DCI to keep compensation low. If and when this happens ( I hope it doesn't) it would be time to take a good hard look in the DPAs direction.
But the most important point - hold the large RJ limit where it is now - 255!
When you find yourself in a hole - stop digging.
Delta can fly as many 76 jets as they want - tomorrow! As long as they are flown by Delta Pilots.
Scoop
Banned
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 623
Likes: 0
From: DAL
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,263
Likes: 105
From: DAL 330
We match Jetblues E-190 rate. Southwest does not fly them, and does not have E-190 rates.
And it is just a start. Lets get the Jets in house.
Or we can keep outsourcing to DCI.
Then again whats your plan?
Scoop
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Actually, I have written it was likely that our MEC had performed this economic study in response to resolutions and for C2012 preparation.
Last edited by Bucking Bar; 04-07-2012 at 04:06 PM.
Can't abide NAI
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Never mind ... source never confirmed date, time, place.
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
From: 330Fo
Good post Scoop
.............
Last edited by Al Czervik; 04-07-2012 at 04:48 PM.
And that's why the 76 seater is going to die on the vine, we don't need to 'trade' anything to recapture that flying, it will have to come to us (or to a 100 seater, and right now, WE own that flying) as fuel prices go up and the minimum wage pilot supply goes down, if we hold the line at 76 seats.
1. The 50 seater and 76 seater are not going to die for economic reasons. I think there will always be two economic reasons for them... 1) RASM-CASM game and 2) whipsawing us.
Need proof? The E190. It sucks, they don't want it here, union even says it sucks. So I guess then it's okay to lift the scope clause and say 50 E190s is okay at DCI, right? Because surely, they'd never order it even though they have 70+ E170/175s with higher CASMs than the E190.
2. We think the 76+ seaters belong to us! But we don't unless it's ordered and even then an LOU could torpedo it. But in real life they simply don't have to order anything, and therein keep to the nothing new below an MD88 at mainline unless it falls in our lap for free. See the illustration below. 

And we look damn good while we're doing it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post


That's "raising the bar?"


