Originally Posted by FL370esq (Post 2193694)

Unlike some here who have only seen sunshine and roses in their Delta career (BobZ it would seem), I have been here long enough to see the "airline cycle" (which I guess equates to Black Swans....) .

Originally Posted by gzsg (Post 2193672)

SWA scope. All Delta regional flying returned to mainline. 5000 pilots. No JV. We do all our international flying.

No PBS. 15% more pilots. 2000 additional pilots. Not saying we should drop PBS, just comparing apples to apples. SWA has no PBS.

Trips touching vacation at SWA. More than double our vacation. 2000 more pilots.

:54 minutes TFP. 800 more Delta pilots.

6.5 TFP for training day and reserve day. 1200 more Delta pilots.

At least 3500 more Delta captains if we had the SWA aip.

Imagine your domestic quality of life if we had 3 day trips worth 22 hours vs our 15:45.

Originally Posted by gzsg (Post 2193672)

SWA scope. All Delta regional flying returned to mainline. 5000 pilots. No JV. We do all our international flying.

No PBS. 15% more pilots. 2000 additional pilots. Not saying we should drop PBS, just comparing apples to apples. SWA has no PBS.

Trips touching vacation at SWA. More than double our vacation. 2000 more pilots.

:54 minutes TFP. 800 more Delta pilots.

6.5 TFP for training day and reserve day. 1200 more Delta pilots.

At least 3500 more Delta captains if we had the SWA aip.

Imagine your domestic quality of life if we had 3 day trips worth 22 hours vs our 15:45.

Originally Posted by BobZ (Post 2193575)

well....we have it on expert economic authority black swans are imminent.....so its only prudent to set ps value at zero....and base our discussions entirely on tangible compensation.

Originally Posted by gzsg (Post 2193672)

SWA scope. All Delta regional flying returned to mainline. 5000 pilots. No JV. We do all our international flying.

You are right.. sorta. If we could instantly in house the DCI flying (only way I see as possible would be to buy them all and staple them). We'd need a few less total pilots than DCI currently uses. Because we wouldn't want their rates and once we applied our rates DL would likely cut some of the flying. And we'd have the ability to bid 50 seater Capt.. any takers? International isn't that easy. Some of our flying is enabled by the international feed and wouldn't otherwise exist. Some of our gate/slot access over the years has been enabled by the JVs. We don't have a decent partner in Japan: how is that working? A few years ago we had zero access to LHR. Neither AMR nor UAL does all their own international flying. You want to know the key? Better OD cities and better partners: that is my opinion and I'm right. I agree our scope protections should be better with stiff penalties.

No PBS. 15% more pilots. 2000 additional pilots. Not saying we should drop PBS, just comparing apples to apples. SWA has no PBS.

OK...apples to apples? Does SWA use 15% more pilots pr hour than DL? No way. I can't get there. A computer program can easily manipulate the available trips to build the minimum number of lines: Its just a math/sorting problem. 15% no posible way. Talk QOL. Senior would not like going back to lines. People who bid RLL and low time or stack their months to allow WS/GS/mini vacation would have less ability to do so.

Trips touching vacation at SWA. More than double our vacation. 2000 more pilots.

I agree, 2000 maybe but I would guess closer to 1000. Not everyone could bid the line that touches 2 6 day trips... because with a line system the computer knows vacations happen and trys to limit those opportunities. However, most could touch something on at least one side of the vaca (some couldn't touch anything). I know. I've been there. 2000 maybe.

:54 minutes TFP. 800 more Delta pilots.

Please explain this. Perhaps I don't know how it works, but mostly wouldn't our small number of short time trips be paid more? Probably cap out sooner and need a small number of additional bodies.

6.5 TFP for training day and reserve day. 1200 more Delta pilots.

?Again: 1200? 6.5 TFP is about 5.7 hours vs proposed 4 hrs. So, ball parking: 14,000 pilots get an extra 3.4 hrs every 9 months. 3.4 X 14000 = 47,600 hrs divided by 9 = 5289 hrs/month div by 80 hr month and I get 66.11 pilots flying 80 hr months. Where do the 1134 others come from. As for the reserve.. SWA's all short call all the time would cut manning requirements and GS/WS availability by a lot. So, wouldn't we just primarily get paid more for training? I'm all for more.

At least 3500 more Delta captains if we had the SWA aip.

I can't get to that number.

Imagine your domestic quality of life if we had 3 day trips worth 22 hours vs our 15:45.

Originally Posted by gzsg (Post 2193672)

SWA scope. All Delta regional flying returned to mainline. 5000 pilots. No JV. We do all our international flying.

No PBS. 15% more pilots. 2000 additional pilots. Not saying we should drop PBS, just comparing apples to apples. SWA has no PBS.

Trips touching vacation at SWA. More than double our vacation. 2000 more pilots.

:54 minutes TFP. 800 more Delta pilots.

6.5 TFP for training day and reserve day. 1200 more Delta pilots.

At least 3500 more Delta captains if we had the SWA aip.

Imagine your domestic quality of life if we had 3 day trips worth 22 hours vs our 15:45.

Originally Posted by OldFlyGuy (Post 2193852)

I agree with this final bit, but its probably just easier for the SWA system to build 7 hour domestic days than it is for a hub system. I don't think our system deliberately makes people sit around, but some are just going to have to sit around in a complex hub and spoke system. Company is maximizing connections and revenue at the expense of our sit around and we should be compensated. But... if we did build 7 hr domestic days on all trips... wouldn't we need a whole lot fewer pilots? From my perspective, If I were flying domestic I'd prefer to work SWA's route system: cram the flying in and get it done. I can agree on that. OFG

Originally Posted by FL370esq (Post 2193841)

No one said to set PS at zero but it is clearly a variable out of our control. If we turn a profit, great, if not, well...we should still have industry leading pay after these negotiations. Why (and how) do we have to place value on a variable? It should be a disbursement over and above to compensate and motivate for windfalls.

This is a cyclic industry with huge variables. Oil, weather, IT meltdowns, stupid management decisions...any and all of which can affect the profit margin. Hopefully we had our one and only "Black Swan" event on 9/11 but I still believe in the business cycle and it isn't always going to be upward. Not sure when it comes down but it will correct itself. It always does.

Originally Posted by FL370esq (Post 2193841)

No one said to set PS at zero but it is clearly a variable out of our control. If we turn a profit, great, if not, well...we should still have industry leading pay after these negotiations. Why (and how) do we have to place value on a variable? It should be a disbursement over and above to compensate and motivate for windfalls.

This is a cyclic industry with huge variables. Oil, weather, IT meltdowns, stupid management decisions...any and all of which can affect the profit margin. Hopefully we had our one and only "Black Swan" event on 9/11 but I still believe in the business cycle and it isn't always going to be upward. Not sure when it comes down but it will correct itself. It always does.