Notices

Details on Delta TA

Old 05-27-2015, 07:17 AM
  #4901  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2014
Posts: 429
Default

Originally Posted by gloopy
Forcing 76 seaters to sunset may not come super cheap, but we should have no problem sunsetting at lease some 50's and increasing the mainline block ratio to at least near current levels. Even 76 seaters should be capped in a check valve style choke point. If they operate less for 6 months, that becomes the new limit, etc.

Same with the AS code share abuse. In fact, not doing so puts DL in a position of perpetual weakness by telling AS management that DL management places a high value on keeping the option open. Better for everyone if they slam the door shut permanently (at least to current levels). SEA is a hub, period. And the AF/KLM issue needs to be settled in a way that increases our share of flying in that and every other JV with strict penalties for non compliance since for half a decade they've shown no desire to honor their agreement without a strong penalty.
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
OldFlyGuy is offline  
Old 05-27-2015, 07:28 AM
  #4902  
Gets Weekends Off
 
poostain's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 351
Default

Originally Posted by forgot to bid
There is no 12 step that would work for me.
Your the dealer dude! This place would break apart without all the funny s$!& you post.
poostain is offline  
Old 05-27-2015, 08:02 AM
  #4903  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,184
Default

Originally Posted by OldFlyGuy
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.
Do you have any reference that the company is out of compliance on this?

Originally Posted by OldFlyGuy
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
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
BenderRodriguez is offline  
Old 05-27-2015, 08:21 AM
  #4904  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Gunfighter's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,568
Default

Originally Posted by OldFlyGuy
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.
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.
Gunfighter is offline  
Old 05-27-2015, 08:23 AM
  #4905  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,544
Default

Originally Posted by OldFlyGuy
Forcing 76 seaters to sunset...? when they are just getting them? Definitely wouldn't be cheap.
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.
gloopy is offline  
Old 05-27-2015, 08:32 AM
  #4906  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,544
Default

Originally Posted by OldFlyGuy
Is the AS agreement out of compliance? I'm not an expert. I may not like it but how is it "abuse?"
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:

SEA is now a hub for us.
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.

Its also AS largest hub and corporate headquarters. Its certainly seems convoluted trying to limit each others operations in any agreement.
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.


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.
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?

I absolutely disagree with any notion we can function in this world solo.
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.

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
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.
gloopy is offline  
Old 05-27-2015, 08:33 AM
  #4907  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,544
Default

Originally Posted by BenderRodriguez
Do you have any reference that the company is out of compliance on this?
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.
gloopy is offline  
Old 05-27-2015, 09:45 AM
  #4908  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,184
Default

Originally Posted by gloopy
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.
BenderRodriguez is offline  
Old 05-27-2015, 10:18 AM
  #4909  
:-)
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Default

Disclosure: Tsquare owns a ton of Delta stock, so he is both about max pay for widebody CA's, and max company profits.
Mesabah is offline  
Old 05-27-2015, 10:19 AM
  #4910  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Posts: 367
Default PWA Scope

From Section 1 SCOPE of the PWA dated January 23rd, 2015

B. Definitions

6. “Alaska hub” means SEA, ANC, LAX and any other airport having a monthly average of at least 100 Alaska scheduled flight departures per day.

23. “Delta hub” means
ATL, CVG, DTW, JFK, LAX, LGA, MEM, MSP, SLC, and any other airport having a monthly average of at least 100 Delta scheduled flight departures per day.
Exception: SEA is not a Delta hub, regardless of the number of scheduled flight departures.

O. Permitted Arrangements Pursuant to the Alaska Marketing Agreement
2. The DL code will not be placed on AS flight segments between Delta hubs whether or not a Delta hub is also an Alaska hub.
3. The DL code will not be placed on AS flight segments to or from a Delta hub.
Exception one: The DL code may be placed on AS flight segments to or from LAX, subject to
Section 1 O. 2. Any such flight segments between LAX and an Alaska hub will be included in the calculations in Section 1 O. 3. Exception two.

5. With respect to flight segments of AS in a city pair, no more than:
a. the following percentage of monthly passenger seats may be occupied by passengers traveling under the DL code:
  • 1) 50% for flights between SEA and either MSP or ATL, and
  • 2) 35% for flights in all other city pairs, or
b. a monthly average of 86 passenger seats may be occupied by passengers traveling under the DL code per flight segment, if in the month involved this results in a lesser number of passenger seats occupied by such passengers than under Section 1 O. 5. a.


Unchanged or without a phaseout of the Alaska Marketing Agreement I am a no vote. The Captain seat vacancies on the west coast have created movement across the entire system and we haven't even taken delivery of an A350 or new A330s.




300SMK is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Kilroy
ExpressJet
10671
01-11-2016 06:49 AM
FastDEW
Major
201
09-03-2011 06:42 AM
Quagmire
Major
253
04-16-2011 06:19 AM
ksatflyer
Hangar Talk
10
08-20-2008 09:14 PM
INAV8OR
Mergers and Acquisitions
66
05-15-2008 04:37 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


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices