Search

Notices

DAL Poolie Info

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-30-2015 | 11:23 AM
  #4831  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,879
Likes: 194
Default

Originally Posted by TNDeltaFlyboy
I'm still a believer in the thinking that they were expecting the TA to reduce immediate hiring needs. If that is true then it's not a stretch to suggest they are waiting for the results of TA 2 before they unleash the pool. Personally, I think it's foolish to create such a large pool with other carriers hiring as much or more as us. We are taking a big risk of losing a good portion of the poolies if they are willing to take the first class date they get. My money says they aren't sitting around only for Delta. Some will but not all.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Had the TA passed they were going to need an additional 370 pilots between now and DEC of 16. An additional 300 pilots were planned for 17. The E190's were going to come very fast and they needed to front load the current new hire categories to they allow for pilots bidding up while filling the E190 slots when training started in the spring. They also had to factor in shifting 717 time back East. That is all off the table for now. RA has also stated that when we return to the table it will be under a traditional section six process so they appear to be in no hurry.
Reply
Old 08-30-2015 | 11:33 AM
  #4832  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
From: everywhere but nowhere
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
Had the TA passed they were going to need an additional 370 pilots between now and DEC of 16. An additional 300 pilots were planned for 17. The E190's were going to come very fast and they needed to front load the current new hire categories to they allow for pilots bidding up while filling the E190 slots when training started in the spring. They also had to factor in shifting 717 time back East. That is all off the table for now. RA has also stated that when we return to the table it will be under a traditional section six process so they appear to be in no hurry.

Understood, however, every instructor I spoke with before the TA vote said they were being told it would result in fewer new hires. How do you explain the increase in TLV? The efficiencies gained from that plus the changes to LCA trip withholding would have most likely offset the extra pilots needed for the 190. The 300 needed for the 717s were already known before the TA vote because there was no increase in that fleet due to the TA, no? I find it hard to believe that wasn't a known quantity already.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Reply
Old 08-30-2015 | 11:37 AM
  #4833  
Moderator
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,489
Likes: 480
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
RA has also stated that when we return to the table it will be under a traditional section six process so they appear to be in no hurry.
This cracks me up. So they were in a hurry before, but suddenly not... Either way, I'm in no hurry either.

Originally Posted by TNDeltaFlyboy
Understood, however, every instructor I spoke with before the TA vote said they were being told it would result in fewer new hires. How do you explain the increase in TLV? The efficiencies gained from that plus the changes to LCA trip withholding would have most likely offset the extra pilots needed for the 190. The 300 needed for the 717s were already known before the TA vote because there was no increase in that fleet due to the TA, no? I find it hard to believe that wasn't a known quantity already.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Woah, woah, woah, let's not talk about that...look over here, shiny objects!
Reply
Old 08-30-2015 | 11:44 AM
  #4834  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,879
Likes: 194
Default

Originally Posted by TNDeltaFlyboy
Understood, however, every instructor I spoke with before the TA vote said they were being told it would result in fewer new hires. How do you explain the increase in TLV? The efficiencies gained from that plus the changes to LCA trip withholding would have most likely offset the extra pilots needed for the 190. The 300 needed for the 717s were already known before the TA vote because there was no increase in that fleet due to the TA, no? I find it hard to believe that wasn't a known quantity already.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
The additional 300 pilots in 17 were for the 190 also. The need to front load bodies was in part to move 717 time. TLV is not the same as ALV and has minimal impact on manning. In addition the union could pull down the TLV increase and manning formulas were unchanged. Trip drops for training would have some impact on manning but offset by additional vacation pay, training pay and new reroute rules. You can argue all day about each individual impact but the company now plans 670 fewer new hires over the next 28 months.
Reply
Old 08-30-2015 | 11:59 AM
  #4835  
poostain's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 351
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
The additional 300 pilots in 17 were for the 190 also. The need to front load bodies was in part to move 717 time. TLV is not the same as ALV and has minimal impact on manning. In addition the union could pull down the TLV increase and manning formulas were unchanged. Trip drops for training would have some impact on manning but offset by additional vacation pay, training pay and new reroute rules. You can argue all day about each individual impact but the company now plans 670 fewer new hires over the next 28 months.
Seriously dude? you think the company isn't going to get the 190's or something similar ever? And now that we have been naughty they will scrap their business plan to punish us? As soon as we start negotiations the new narrow body's will be back on the table. Predicting how many more or less new hires we need in 28 months is futile. Whatever their plan is today is subject to change tomorrow.
Reply
Old 08-30-2015 | 12:02 PM
  #4836  
Imapilot2's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
From: Captain Jack
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
The additional 300 pilots in 17 were for the 190 also. The need to front load bodies was in part to move 717 time. TLV is not the same as ALV and has minimal impact on manning. In addition the union could pull down the TLV increase and manning formulas were unchanged. Trip drops for training would have some impact on manning but offset by additional vacation pay, training pay and new reroute rules. You can argue all day about each individual impact but the company now plans 670 fewer new hires over the next 28 months.
What happened man? I'm just as proud of working for Delta as you. Always spoke highly of Delta. But honestly dude the kool-aid you're drinking and the way that you talk about this failed contract.....Holly mackerel. Everything you say lately has a twist showing how you feel we were all wrong and look at all this great stuff we screwed up.
Reply
Old 08-30-2015 | 12:20 PM
  #4837  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,879
Likes: 194
Default

Originally Posted by Imapilot2
What happened man? I'm just as proud of working for Delta as you. Always spoke highly of Delta. But honestly dude the kool-aid you're drinking and the way that you talk about this failed contract.....Holly mackerel. Everything you say lately has a twist showing how you feel we were all wrong and look at all this great stuff we screwed up.
The question was why the longer pool. I made no comment on the TA. Call crew planning yourself and ask them. Fewer aircraft equals fewer pilots. I am sure they have another plan in the works. It might be better or it might be worse but for the moment the plan is fewer pilots.
Reply
Old 08-30-2015 | 12:21 PM
  #4838  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,879
Likes: 194
Default

Originally Posted by poostain
Seriously dude? you think the company isn't going to get the 190's or something similar ever? And now that we have been naughty they will scrap their business plan to punish us? As soon as we start negotiations the new narrow body's will be back on the table. Predicting how many more or less new hires we need in 28 months is futile. Whatever their plan is today is subject to change tomorrow.
They will simply adopt the business plan they feel is on their best overall financial interest. Nothing more or less.
Reply
Old 08-30-2015 | 02:37 PM
  #4839  
Flying Elvis's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 391
Likes: 1
From: Utah Chapter
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
Had the TA passed they were going to need an additional 370 pilots between now and DEC of 16. An additional 300 pilots were planned for 17.
These would have been more than offset by concessions including ALV/TLV, LCA holdback, and anticipated sick leave gains.
Reply
Old 08-30-2015 | 05:40 PM
  #4840  
MikeF16's Avatar
Otto
 
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,806
Likes: 0
From: Turkish Pile Driver
Default

Originally Posted by Paok
Haven't been able to move or drop a trip as 737B NYC for the last year 😕
You missed the point completely.

The post was not about moving and not moving trips, it was about trying to reduce the size of the pool when there is sim time available. Now, if the 73n sim is also being underutilized then my argument would hold up for both airframes.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Trash Hauler
Major
138
06-11-2012 06:48 AM
Bill Lumberg
Major
32
05-30-2012 03:51 AM
FIIGMO
Major
120
05-15-2012 07:54 PM
AerisArmis
Cargo
9
12-01-2010 05:50 PM
acl65pilot
Major
36
10-29-2008 06:29 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices