Notices

Details on Delta TA

Old 06-09-2015 | 08:22 PM
  #6971  
80ktsClamp's Avatar
Da Hudge
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
Default

Originally Posted by JungleBus
This is not a scope improvement, this is doubling down on C2012: fixing management's DCI staffing problem for them, breathing new life into a repugnant outsourcing scheme, and acting like buying flying we already own is some sort of scope victory.

Name one single contract since 1996 when DALPA hasn't given given management more of the biggest, most advanced, most mainliney RJs available at the time. You can't. They are habitually unable and unwilling to draw and defend a line on narrowbody scope (and now it turns out, widebody scope too). This is yet another capitulation and the best thing that can be said about it is that it's not as big as the last one.
That's why I said despite 25 more jumbo RJs. I don't disagree. The block hour ratios get to where I thought they should be in C2012, plus the closing of the republic loophole and other areas were good.

I was trying to be fair and give credit where it was due as far as a more positive aspect.

Remember that they haven't even exercised all the options on the 76 seaters that they can currently do in this case. With all the mud in this mediocre at best contract, I considered that one of the lower threat items as far as gives. That's all that I was saying.
Reply
Old 06-09-2015 | 08:24 PM
  #6972  
80ktsClamp's Avatar
Da Hudge
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
Default

Originally Posted by LeineLodge
Actually, taken word for word 80's quote above is correct. The TA does further lock in mainline flying:

1. The total number of RJ's is reduced from 450 to 425.
2. The mainline to DCI block hour ratio is increased from a maximum min (if that even makes sense ) of 1.56 to 1.81. Prior to the JPWA the ratio was somewhere around 0.9.

I'm not saying it's right, and I would rather not see 25 more 76 seaters, but these are 2 improvements over the current PWA. Do they offset having more 76 seaters? We only have to decide if the MEC sends it to memrat tomorrow afternoon. We will see soon enough.

As for the carrot and stick routine with the 190's, I am in complete agreement. We should not consider that in our decision on this deal at all. They can buy them or not, and our blessing is not required either way. The only thing the TA does wrt the 190's IMO is get the rates for them up to where they ought to be. If they come under the current rates my prediction is you will see street captains (or nearly so) because nobody currently on the property would bid it.
Absolutely spot on!
Reply
Old 06-09-2015 | 08:27 PM
  #6973  
UPTme's Avatar
Hire me
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by JungleBus
I flew the E175 for 6.5 years, 6 of those as a CA. It's actually a very comfortable cockpit, and a nice-flying, well-designed, reliable airplane. I fly the MadDog now and it's slightly more cramped, far less comfortable temps, far less reliable, tries to kill or violate me with some regularity, and makes me work about 3x as hard as I ever did in the Ejet. I'll gladly, gladly take my Delta upgrade in the E195. It's ok that you and many others don't want to do narrowbody flying, that will allow those of us who are junior much better seniority in the left seat. Choices are a good thing.

That said, I'm still not willing to let management outsource one more mainline-replacement RJ to get 195s.
Great post. Especially the last line.
Reply
Old 06-09-2015 | 08:27 PM
  #6974  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
That's why I said despite 25 more jumbo RJs. I don't disagree. The block hour ratios get to where I thought they should be in C2012, plus the closing of the republic loophole and other areas were good.

I was trying to be fair and give credit where it was due as far as a more positive aspect.

Remember that they haven't even exercised all the options on the 76 seaters that they can currently do in this case. With all the mud in this mediocre at best contract, I considered that one of the lower threat items as far as gives. That's all that I was saying.
Why give 25 more large RJs up however? I suspect the 50 seaters go either way. They aren't economical anymore.
Reply
Old 06-09-2015 | 08:29 PM
  #6975  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,184
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by JungleBus

That said, I'm still not willing to let management outsource one more mainline-replacement RJ to get 195s.
What exactly are they replacing?
Reply
Old 06-09-2015 | 08:29 PM
  #6976  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Default

I don't want to lose the focus of what we're talking about here I do believe that more improvements could be made to this TA. As for what I did before Delta I was a ferry pilot and worked for a regional airline. I have flown more than 20 different types and makes of aircraft including the E170 thru 195, Crj 200, 700 and 900, DC 9, 727, 57,67, Air Bus family and have been on some proving flights of the C series. Like I said don't want to lose our focus of the TA. You asked what I did and I am just telling you. I know how it feels to spend hours on end in a smaller plane. I just don't like that the company puts a new category out to try to pass this TA. It's the same as when they asked for consesionIt's the same as when they asked for concessions if you give us this will give you that. Don't fall for the bait.
Reply
Old 06-09-2015 | 08:33 PM
  #6977  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Airbusdude14
I don't want to lose the focus of what we're talking about here I do believe that more improvements could be made to this TA. As for what I did before Delta I was a ferry pilot and worked for a regional airline. I have flown more than 20 different types and makes of aircraft including the E170 thru 195, Crj 200, 700 and 900, DC 9, 727, 57,67, Air Bus family and have been on some proving flights of the C series. Like I said don't want to lose our focus of the TA. You asked what I did and I am just telling you. I know how it feels to spend hours on end in a smaller plane. I just don't like that the company puts a new category out to try to pass this TA. It's the same as when they asked for consesionIt's the same as when they asked for concessions if you give us this will give you that. Don't fall for the bait.
E195 cockpit is nicer than the MadDog. Just saying.
Reply
Old 06-09-2015 | 08:34 PM
  #6978  
80ktsClamp's Avatar
Da Hudge
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
Default

Originally Posted by WidgetDriver
Why give 25 more large RJs up however? I suspect the 50 seaters go either way. They aren't economical anymore.
I agree all around.
Reply
Old 06-09-2015 | 08:34 PM
  #6979  
Carl Spackler's Avatar
Back on TDY
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
Default

Originally Posted by Hank Kingsley
Several area code seniority pilots are voicing "hell no" on this forum. I'm one.
I'm still undecided.

Carl
Reply
Old 06-09-2015 | 08:35 PM
  #6980  
Justdoinmyjob's Avatar
Looking for a laugh
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,099
Likes: 0
Default

The current caps on RJs are 223 76 seaters, 102 70 seaters and 125 50 seaters for a total fleet of 450 RJs. there are currently 198 76 seaters, 102 70 seaters and 125 50 seaters. They can still add those 25 76ers tomorrow if they want under C12.

The new total RJs under C15 is 425 RJs, which is 223 76ers, 102 70s and 100 50s. They still only are allowed the 25 76ers but must park 25 50s.

Not sure why everyone is focusing on this non issue. There are much bigger issues wrong with this TA.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Kilroy
ExpressJet
10796
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