Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
04-18-2012 | 09:15 AM
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
Maybe, but there is the untested and nebulous "federal merger law" although that could be end rounded because as we all know, "it depends on what the definition of a merger is". Plus they have individual contracts with aparently "strong" language in it, but again its untested and would be very interesting to watch an attempt to enforce.
That said, buying B6 in whole would be insane and potentially disasterous for our pilot group because if there was some way for them to get anywhere close to a relative/ratio integration, we would be absolutely slaughtered, even with widebody fences, based on longevity actuarials. Halfway up the list is around 5 years. Think about that. Then think about the immedtate fallout:
They get a ratio (their 10 year pilots zippered in with our 25-30+ year pilots, their 4 year pilots blended in the list with our 15 year pilots) and then we proceed to divest massive portions of what we just "bought" to appease the regulators. So B6 pilots get a longevity windfall and then the list is shrunk significantly as slots and gates are divested like crazy (likely in a court ordered SWA charity case but maybe with some NK and VX and I'd bet even AA or USAir pre-AA merger thrown in for good measure).
So we run the risk of getting absolutely hammered in the biggest seniority windfall in history (not in our favor) and then we divest much of the new transaction and that excess comes off the new combined list with PM-D pilots far, far below their PM-JB counterparts at all seniority tiers.
If we got B6 we would have to divest a lot anyway. Divesting up front and making it a fragmentation just beyond the thesholds of McCaskill-Bond and the non union contract would be the only way to guarantee a seamless acquisition of the parts we really wanted without slaughtering the DL list if it ever got to arbitration.
That said, buying B6 in whole would be insane and potentially disasterous for our pilot group because if there was some way for them to get anywhere close to a relative/ratio integration, we would be absolutely slaughtered, even with widebody fences, based on longevity actuarials. Halfway up the list is around 5 years. Think about that. Then think about the immedtate fallout:
They get a ratio (their 10 year pilots zippered in with our 25-30+ year pilots, their 4 year pilots blended in the list with our 15 year pilots) and then we proceed to divest massive portions of what we just "bought" to appease the regulators. So B6 pilots get a longevity windfall and then the list is shrunk significantly as slots and gates are divested like crazy (likely in a court ordered SWA charity case but maybe with some NK and VX and I'd bet even AA or USAir pre-AA merger thrown in for good measure).
So we run the risk of getting absolutely hammered in the biggest seniority windfall in history (not in our favor) and then we divest much of the new transaction and that excess comes off the new combined list with PM-D pilots far, far below their PM-JB counterparts at all seniority tiers.
If we got B6 we would have to divest a lot anyway. Divesting up front and making it a fragmentation just beyond the thesholds of McCaskill-Bond and the non union contract would be the only way to guarantee a seamless acquisition of the parts we really wanted without slaughtering the DL list if it ever got to arbitration.
04-18-2012 | 09:50 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,844
Likes: 0
From: 765-A
Spot on as always, newK. I knew that was the cultural precedent when I checked out on the fleet, and I really was just throwing my input in since everyone else seems to be talking about walkarounds.
I've got my routine that I do each flight and that includes a walkaround... if I happen to not have to do that, it's just a little bonus!
BTW, did that DC-9 that poo'd itself all over ATL today just find out that you bid off the fleet or something?
I've got my routine that I do each flight and that includes a walkaround... if I happen to not have to do that, it's just a little bonus!
BTW, did that DC-9 that poo'd itself all over ATL today just find out that you bid off the fleet or something?
You don't have to do walkarounds on the Airbus anyway, do you? Doesn't that thing have exterior video monitors that you can punch up on one of those tv screens, or something?
Galdangit. I'm out of the DC-9 loop already. What happened in the ATL yesterday?
04-18-2012 | 09:57 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Maybe, but there is the untested and nebulous "federal merger law" although that could be end rounded because as we all know, "it depends on what the definition of a merger is". Plus they have individual contracts with aparently "strong" language in it, but again its untested and would be very interesting to watch an attempt to enforce.
That said, buying B6 in whole would be insane and potentially disasterous for our pilot group because if there was some way for them to get anywhere close to a relative/ratio integration, we would be absolutely slaughtered, even with widebody fences, based on longevity actuarials. Halfway up the list is around 5 years. Think about that. Then think about the immedtate fallout:
They get a ratio (their 10 year pilots zippered in with our 25-30+ year pilots, their 4 year pilots blended in the list with our 15 year pilots) and then we proceed to divest massive portions of what we just "bought" to appease the regulators. So B6 pilots get a longevity windfall and then the list is shrunk significantly as slots and gates are divested like crazy (likely in a court ordered SWA charity case but maybe with some NK and VX and I'd bet even AA or USAir pre-AA merger thrown in for good measure).
So we run the risk of getting absolutely hammered in the biggest seniority windfall in history (not in our favor) and then we divest much of the new transaction and that excess comes off the new combined list with PM-D pilots far, far below their PM-JB counterparts at all seniority tiers.
If we got B6 we would have to divest a lot anyway. Divesting up front and making it a fragmentation just beyond the thesholds of McCaskill-Bond and the non union contract would be the only way to guarantee a seamless acquisition of the parts we really wanted without slaughtering the DL list if it ever got to arbitration.
That said, buying B6 in whole would be insane and potentially disasterous for our pilot group because if there was some way for them to get anywhere close to a relative/ratio integration, we would be absolutely slaughtered, even with widebody fences, based on longevity actuarials. Halfway up the list is around 5 years. Think about that. Then think about the immedtate fallout:
They get a ratio (their 10 year pilots zippered in with our 25-30+ year pilots, their 4 year pilots blended in the list with our 15 year pilots) and then we proceed to divest massive portions of what we just "bought" to appease the regulators. So B6 pilots get a longevity windfall and then the list is shrunk significantly as slots and gates are divested like crazy (likely in a court ordered SWA charity case but maybe with some NK and VX and I'd bet even AA or USAir pre-AA merger thrown in for good measure).
So we run the risk of getting absolutely hammered in the biggest seniority windfall in history (not in our favor) and then we divest much of the new transaction and that excess comes off the new combined list with PM-D pilots far, far below their PM-JB counterparts at all seniority tiers.
If we got B6 we would have to divest a lot anyway. Divesting up front and making it a fragmentation just beyond the thesholds of McCaskill-Bond and the non union contract would be the only way to guarantee a seamless acquisition of the parts we really wanted without slaughtering the DL list if it ever got to arbitration.
04-18-2012 | 10:04 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,844
Likes: 0
From: 765-A
Not only did he extinguish the fires with his crosswind landing technique, after the tower controller played the ATC tapes on one of the local radio stations, he was a invited to the Ecuadorian version of the Grammys. I think he will be nominated for best new international artist.
Superpilot indeed.
04-18-2012 | 10:21 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
I'm going to jump in the walk-around stuff, a) because 80 is doing it, and I feel a little jealous, and b) because of another great post by Knew.
If a Captain doesn't do the walk-around, we F/O's don't question it, but we hope it's for a good reason. As Knew pointed out, the Captain at NW had a lot of duties inside, and it would not have made sense for him/her to walk-around as well.
Now, with the PF loading the box, there is more time for the Captain on the F/O's leg. If there is a lot of time, the F/O can do both a walk-around, and load the box. If there isn't, it only seems smart for the Captain to walk-around, but there is room for flexibility. Which tells me that a Captain that never walks around isn't doing it for operational reasons, but because he just won't.
I also think I understand what BrakeChatter wrote. Personally, I always see a difference between people that can't, and people that won't. Some people don't make great PA',s and I respect them for knowing their limitations. Some F/O's start the trip by saying they "don't do PA's", or "don't wear their hat". Just like people that don't "do crossing restrictions", I think they deserve honorable mentions for NERD's "TOD" thread.
I fly with plenty of North guys, and almost all do some intelligent portion of walk-arounds. Whether they decide on a case-by-case basis, or have a 50-50 policy, they show a willingness to adapt, and I think that's great. They didn't get it done for them, but they know full well that I will do it when it's my turn, and they don't penalize me for the change in procedures. Some South guys are actually using the merger as an excuse for their "won'ts". They invariably feel obligated to make some perfuntory speech to justify themselves. I got no problem with it: I just nod, and mentally shift them over to NERD's TOD thread.
So it's not a NvS issue, but a "can't", or "won't " issue.
And it's not a technical issue, or a matter of other responsibilities. With their experience, there are times when the Captain would be the best person to perform the walk-around, assuming the cabin is fully squared away. It's not always the case, and it's not necessarily the case 50% of the time, but it certainly is not never the case.
So it's normal that some Captains don't do exactly 50% of walk-arounds. I have to note that when anyone, right or left seat, gets to a point where they have to explain their particular "won'ts", they know full well they deserve a place of the TOD thread. It may make them feel a little better that the other guy doesn't challenge them on it, but they shouldn't delude themselves to think it's OK. Shirley, I'm not fooled, so the only person that they're attempting to fool is themselves, which you'll have to admit is rather pathetic. Most guys know this, deep down. Which is why I've had a few guys explain to me right at sign in that nobody did walk-arounds for them, and they'll be damned if they will. I just nod and smile. We get in, we start the trip, I work as hard with them as with anyone else, and when we're a leg or two into the trip, most of them will do the right thing all by themselves anyway, and go take a lap around the aircraft. For everyone of me, there is a Captain that just nods and smiles when the F/O walks in and tells them their "rules". The difference of course is that F/O behavior can be changed by Captains' authority, but Captain's behavior is changed mostly when they realize their foolishness is blatantly hanging out in the open.
Bottom line: the Captain that always takes middle break, the F/O that "doesn't do" PA's, the Captain that "doesn't do" walk-arounds, they're all just members of the same species, and best catalogued on NERD's TOD thread.
Last edited by Sink r8; 04-18-2012 at 10:40 AM.
04-18-2012 | 10:28 AM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
Great post sink.
04-18-2012 | 10:37 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
Thanks, ftb. While editing, I just realized it's sort of laid out there like a huge trap. Let's see if anyone feels offended by it, and takes the bait.
04-18-2012 | 10:41 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,039
Likes: 0
From: 7ERB
However, you do need ETOPS WestCoast to Hawaiian Isle. or Hawaiian Isle. to GUAM/NRT etc.
A little black birdie told me that the 900er is going to be a Hawaiian machine.
TEN
04-18-2012 | 10:51 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,831
Likes: 172
From: window seat
There is nothing, and I mean nothing, that RA and the DL BOD are fiscally capabile of offering us that would justify paving the way for an outright JB merger in its entirety. If that's what they have in mind with "certain opportunities" then we need to milk the RLA for all the years we can get out of it even at current book and give them a USAir style merger.
04-18-2012 | 11:27 AM
Da Hudge
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
Great attitude, 80. I guess those guys that don't want to do them feel they did enough already, or are afraid of falling down the steps, or something. No big deal. Or, at least it shouldn't be.
You don't have to do walkarounds on the Airbus anyway, do you? Doesn't that thing have exterior video monitors that you can punch up on one of those tv screens, or something?
Galdangit. I'm out of the DC-9 loop already. What happened in the ATL yesterday?
You don't have to do walkarounds on the Airbus anyway, do you? Doesn't that thing have exterior video monitors that you can punch up on one of those tv screens, or something?
Galdangit. I'm out of the DC-9 loop already. What happened in the ATL yesterday?
As far as that DC-9, apparently one had an engine deposit its innards all over one of the inboard runways at ATL yesterday. Yowza.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
