I absolutely agree with sunsetting the 76s. Let them die of natural causes. We shouldn't have to pay for that either. We have a contract. What I am again is buying their presence on mainline.

As to the AK portion, I agree again that SEA is a hub. I would think that would be a no brainer on this TA. I don't know enough about the other stuff you mention so I will defer to you on that.

I downloaded MEC Scope compliance analysis from the May meeting, and it is not until the last page that you find anything out of compliance. Of course you don't have the narrative to go with the PP presentation slides, but on the surface it does not appear to be the gloom and doom that some make it out to be. What say you?

Forcing 76 seaters to sunset...? when they are just getting them? Definitely wouldn't be cheap. How would that even happen unless DAL bought the 76 seat operators? No need to even discuss 50 seat as I'm pretty sure they are self destructing. Mgmt may want more 76 seat flexibility to help the RJ operators as the 50s go away, but that is too bad. Not my problem. Is the AS agreement out of compliance? I'm not an expert. I may not like it but how is it "abuse?" SEA is now a hub for us. Its also AS largest hub and corporate headquarters. Its certainly seems convoluted trying to limit each others operations in any agreement. AF/KLM I agree it needs fixing. But I also doubt the non compliance has cost us the bazillion jobs some think. Nevertheless, I expect a penalty and better future enforcement. I absolutely disagree with any notion we can function in this world solo. But I don't like that our JV partners always seem to need lots of big metal. And IMO DAL seems content to resell tickets. Eventually if we don't have the metal aren't we marginalized or expendable to the JV? Which puts us... solo. Hmm. UAL and AAL have better Intl venture partners than DAL IMO and it seems to be working to the "metal" benefit of all. I'm concerned about that. A lot. OFG

Your the dealer dude! This place would break apart without all the funny s$!& you post.

Do you have any reference that the company is out of compliance on this?

This is a good paragraph. What is also interesting is that DAL is taking a different tack than the other 2 in terms of debt/leverage. We are in good times. It will be interesting to see what happens to AAL and UAL when the economy takes a turn down. And contrary to what Jerry thinks, it WILL at some point take a turn. It might not be for awhile, but leveraging the mortgage is not a good idea in good times

WRT 50 seaters, the shrinking fleets of 50s will pair up nicely with mainline hiring. It may actually help the regionals meet staffing levels as they face major attrition to the majors.

There's PLENTY (hundreds) more 76 seaters that have been in service for a long time and some are always coming up on contract expiration. Don't inject unnecessary hyperbole into this.

The company is not out of (current) agreement with AS. That's because its almost impossible for them to be because its written to insanely liberally (for them). In fact, we are WAY below the level of AS code share abuse that could be happening (and was happening) but that is because Delta's EVP of West Coast Pilot Hiring (Brad Tilden, who ocasionally moonlights as the Alaskan Air Line CEO) has chosen to flip Richard the bird and double dog dare him to do anything about it. But the abuse could continue at any time, at management's discretion…AKA that is a serious lack of job security, which brings us to:

No its not. Read your contract. It is specifically exempt in our current PWA WRT Alaskan Air Line regardless of how big it gets for us. Meaning, at any time, AS could come roaring back and stop or reduce our growth there and there is nothing we can do about it, because SEA is NOT a hub. This needs to change and is a VERY high priority issue.

I don't care about limiting Alaskan Air Line in any market. They can do whatever they want and no one cares. Its what they do within the DL code share agreement that concerns us. They can quadrouple SEA if they want to, I don't care. What I care about is what they can do on behald of DL.


Good. I don't think its 5000 jobs either. But its jobs, and we need full and complete restitution now AND going forward. And if half a decade of "our half" being defined as 48.5% then the next half decade can be defined as 51.5% in our favor, and then an even 50/50 after that. Fair enough?

Agreed. We need JV's and JV's are a reality of the industry. I just want our pilots to be protected with current flying and a fair share of the growth that they generate.

Agreed. Its contract time in the most favorable time in history. Its time to make gains all across Section 1. It is THE most important issue.

It isn't even disputed by the company that they are out of compliance. There is an open grievance right now because of it, and all parties admit 100% that there is a lack of compliance. This isn't even up for debate. You should know this.

Yeah, I do know that, but I was wondering if you had any references for it other than just forum hyperbole. The only thing I have on it is the Scope analysis PP slides frot he May MEC meeting and it is a little vague. Things on here tend to get blown out of proportion. Hard to believe, I know.

Disclosure: Tsquare owns a ton of Delta stock, so he is both about max pay for widebody CA's, and max company profits.