i’m obviously lost between 2 conversations, but congrats and welcome aboard!

 

Currently interviewing 16 a day, 4 days a week.

 

I don’t want to put a damper on anything but make sure you keep your current job until as close to your class date as possible. The Coronavirus May end up a simple blip or it may impact hiring and fleet plans for years.

 

That's always a wise plan. However many airlines don't like (or tolerate) "dual citizenship" so to speak, so tread very lightly trying to finagle leaves/vacation/etc or otherwise trying to hedge your bets. If you go, just commit and go.

This may be a good time to revisit LOA 19 (I think) and formulate a plan for flow downs. Contrary to the bathroom wall sea lawyers, it doesn't seem like there's anything in that LOA stipulating the flow down was ever repealed with any status change with CPZ. If the company furloughs, it seems like they are still under the obligation to provide for the job equivalent of the number of large RJ's that the same LOA provided for in the first place based only off of the flow down protections. IOW, if they furlough, they'll have to park 30ish large RJ's unless they provide flow down opportunities at up to year 4 pay IOW the very LOA that allows that number of large RJ's to exist at any airline.

 

I had to look up the LOA for a refresher; it’s #9 by the way. Also, keep in mind that CPZ is on the way out from DCI as is GoJet. So, not sure how Delta can enforce this LOA once the separation is complete.

 

There is little chance of furloughs at Delta given the layers of economic furlough protection in the contract. Still if the virus takes off in the US there will be a economic penalty to the pilot group. Given our current relationship with the company it’s unlikely we will be able to negotiate a mitigation strategy.

 

Just utter the words "force majeure"....like a Ginsu through warm butter. 😁

 

DL's ability to enforce it through CPZ or whoever ends up getting those or the equivalent number of airframes provided for in that LOA isn't our problem. The only thing we need to care about is that there needs to be a flow down provision for the equivalent number of jobs that go with the jets that the particular LoA allows. IIRC its somewhere in the neighborhood of 400-500 positions, at the top of the list, half CA half FO, at up to 4 years longevity pay depending on variables. If they can't get a large RJ provider to agree, then we should try and get the system board to make them pull down that number of large RJ's from the totals. I think its a case we would win. If not then so be it, but they can't just liquidate their end of the deal unilaterally. That number of large RJ's only exist as a condition to there being a flow down. Either park the RJ's or pay whichever regional will agree for the full cost of the bump and flush to accomidate it.

 

That is why Moak changed are contractual furlough protections from a furlough protection statement to a series of economic penalties that would not be subject to FM. It was like profit sharing derided at the time. It kept 600 Delta pilots on the payroll during the 09 downturn and hopefully will do the same if this virus takes a turn for the worst.

 

The LOA you brought up becomes null and void once CPZ leaves the DCI network, no? They agreed to a flow down because they got a flow up. So, IMHO, we won’t gain another flow down unless we grant a flow up to that large RJ operator. However, since we have an institutional aversion to flows, I don’t think we’ll see something along the lines of the CPZ LOA again any time soon.