Airline Pilot Central Forums - Details on Delta TA

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)

- - Details on Delta TA (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/88532-details-delta-ta.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1887666)

As to the bottom, and let me get my soap box, the reality is that yes while they're having trouble staffing DCI and we're growing... the growth is not written in stone. It's not required.

Exactly. Same for Seattle. We are only enjoying the growth there because Delta's EVP of west Coast Pilot Hiring (Brad Tilden, who occasionally moonlights as the CEO of Alaskan Air Line) single handedly decided to force our hand. But he can reverse course in a milisecond and our growth there could stop or easily reverse. That's why its crucial to undo the failed Alaska code share abuse language, particularly the "SEA shall never ever ever get back together as a hub" carve out, among other gaping holes.

Quote:

DCI/ATA/DAL could fix its issues, eliminate 1500 hour rule, etc, and fix their staffing woes and back they come with a fleet of 325 jumbo RJs that could very well increase in C2015 if you yahoos are right.

How quickly people forget. These are the boom times, let's conceed on scope because it helps the mainline grow! :rolleyes: I can't believe ANYone would fall for that again.

Quote:

If they did want to get rid of the 88 fleet as rumored, they could park nearly 90% of those 117 jets and still be in compliance with 1.47. DAL wanted an out from required growth and we gave it to them.

That was a huge concession from C2012 that we gave them that is easy to not notice because they haven't chosen to wield it yet.

Quote:

If the 88 B717s were truly to be growth over 2012 numbers then the min ratio should have been 1.7 for DCI at its current size and 1.8 at 450 DCI jets. If you want to get rid of a ML fleet, you better replace it 1:1 or park RJs.

exactly.

Quote:

We need more things in Section 1 written in stone to match the intent of what is sold. A car dealer saying a car will last 250,000 miles but only offering a 35,000 mile warranty is very different then one who gives you 250,000 mile bumper to bumper.

My FTB speaks for me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xray678 (Post 1887704)

The loss of wide body flying and more stagnation from another age change are much bigger threats to my career than more 76 seat jets that they will have trouble staffing anyway.

You really think they would be asking if they couldn't staff them? Especially when how its written would probably replace more smaller "RJs" for fewer "larger RJ's" thus alleviating their staffing problem, at least to some degree? You really think this is a way to extract value from their stupidity and roll it into payrates or whatever?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moonshine (Post 1887819)

New rumor: 13/9/5/5

13% DOS
9% 1/1/2016
5% 1/1/2017
5% 1/1/2018

And heels are dug in on keeping profit sharing same. From what I heard MEC has no plan to back down.

IF true, that would probably pass…assuming there weren't embedded concessions in it at all levels especially "productivity" and scope. I'm not willing to sell hundreds of jobs in work rule changes nor conceed one inch on widebody, Alaska or RJ scope. Not one inch. Any change to Section 1 much be all positive and no negative.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 1887854)

9955 trial balloon busted so let's try 13955. Who says we aren't negotiating in public. And I'm with you....no concessions. Sick leave, PS, OE recovery.....stuff like that gets worse and I'm a no. Tired of bunting and never scoring a run.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 1887854)

We already know from the leaks that it comes with concessions in other areas like sick leave , scope, and LCA bidding...So you will have to decide if a payraise is worth other concessions. My feeling is that over 50% of the pilots would vote for that in a heartbeat. All most care about is higher pay..I personally think we should get that payraise with NO concessions at all, but I always in the minority when I vote on our TA's.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 1887842)

I don't think we will see this exact incarnation of scope concessions. That would be impossible to sell even to the kool aid drinkers and the trust addicts. What I see them doing is trying to replace 50's with 70's or 76'ers or 70's with 76'ers on a slightly negative airframe/block hour basis and trying to paint that as a win. But to go for unlimited 70 seaters would rhetorically undo everything the "hard total DCI limits for the first time in history" from C2012.

I think the first TA will see attempted scope concessions at DCI (and if so it should be a no vote on that issue alone) but not unlimited 70s. That would be a huge overplay of their hand and would do more to unify us over RJ scope than we otherwise would be.

This was from the chitchat forum.

Definately an attempt to make settling for xx more 76 seat jets for DCI as they park 50 seat jets seem less horrible.

I can't believe our reps would even consider this.

Int'l Jumpseat taxes and fees

Didn't want to start a new thread.

Planning to Jumpseat from Europe to USA next month on DL and have tight connection. Several times before I've paid my taxes and fees in advance to simplify things for the trip home and lessen the chance I miss the flight by waiting in the ticket line at the European airport. (I know I can't list for the Jumpseat until departing from the European airport, and I know as OAL I must ride in a cabin seat atm.)

But, at two USA airport ticket counters (DL mainline) in past week, I've been met with blank stares and their calls to the internal help lines have been useless. I've done this at least 5 times before (admittedly last time was over 2 years ago) and don't understand why the special services/ticket folks are no longer familiar with this?

Can anyone help with a DL computer reference on the procedure? I'd provide the star code, file reference, or whatever you call it, to the next agent and try again.

PMs welcome if you don't want to post here....thanks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RonRicco (Post 1887081)

Certainly a few of the former regulars who are now involved and voted "no" to 2012, will have to "own" their "yes" vote and cant suggest that it was somehow outside their direction as reasoning. (Unless of course they get something sprung on them again).

As applicable a statement going into C2012 and, arguably, before that... Curious what your reaction would have been had someone posted likewise as you prepared to vote back then.

Who owns yours?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 1887838)

LOL oh please. You've got to be kidding, right?

We gave a staffing concession because we wanted to be professionals?

Management was like "we don't care if you get paid to sit at home, thus driving the need for more pilot staffing and a larger training bubble" and we were like "aw come on boss, please let us fly before TOE so we can hone our skills and honor our sacred obligation to those entrusted in our care" and management was like "oh, I don't kow about that" and we were all "please! please let us fly, possibly for free, and in any case compulsory at your discretion not ours, for professionalism!" and they were like "sigh, fine, if it means that much to you…"

And not being able to be scheduled for domestic flights prior to TOE is unprofessional? That's got to be the silliest hyperbole I've ever read on a forum.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say you were just trying to be sarcastic.

Throttle back a little. I have talked to a lot of newhires that have said they wouldn't mind flying domestic for awhile before going on TOE so that they could get comfortable in the airplane. I don't think that a bad thing. I still find it refreshing despite your condescension. Like someone else was saying in another post, what is good for YOU might not be good for ME or for someone else. It's not always about the money.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 1887847)

We are growing (really just recapturing a relatively small portion of previously lost) mainline block hours precicely because thing are bat at the regionals. Making that cut throat back stabbing business model more viable should be THE LAST thing we should ever consider even putting in a TA.

No deal. Automatic no vote.

How many automatic no votes do you have? Just curious.

Drama.