Scope and Cost Neutral
 

In my opinion.


JV scope immediately in compliance.

Allowing convergence to block hours.

$300 million a year and beyond imagination going forward 10 years. Well over $1 Billion per year.

50 more 76 seat jets to DCI.

$300 million per year.

Aips

$200 million per year.

Total $800 million per year.

Cost neutral

Self funding

Why are we making concessions?

Did you do this math on the same calculator where you came up with 8000 more pilots for the WN agreement?

Tell me something 80.

How many more Delta pilots if we flew all the DCI jets?

I know I'm crazy. Wanting Delta routes and Delta jets to be flown by Delta seniority list pilots.

I'm crazy and stupid because I don't think we should make concessions. The United, UPS, SWA and FedEx pilots are so dumb. Why can't they understand the Hanson method of concessions and self funding?

80 what are your numbers for scope concessions?

50 more 76 seat jets to DCI? $xxx

JV scope immediately in compliance? $xxx

JV scope to block hours? $xxx

That's awesome. Looks like the bad dpa leaks started early.

Too bad we will never see a costing sheet either. Gotta love this new transparency. We didn't give concessions we made some trades!

Could I pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today?

80, Please explain to us how he is wrong again?

Over 4000 pilots fly Delta Connection jets. Does Southwest allow 50-76 seat jets to be outsourced? Southwest also has line bidding with vacation trip touching. Explain to us how 3:15 credit per day at Delta is the same.

He won't answer your question because it will be an admission by himself that he was wrong that your numbers are wrong.

Your 8000 number is much closer to the truth that he will admit.

Sorry, but if you think the average line pilot, for the smallest fraction of a nano-second will hold out for a contract that brings all DCI flying in-house, seriously dude, you HAVE GOT TO give me the number for your supplier!

How about just holding the line on what we have already given. No more SCOPE gives.

So 4000= 8000? Math is hard!!

Meanwhile, our butts are hanging in the breeze with this little thing called "MAINLINE BLOCK HOUR RATIO."

Hours. Seats. Hulls. All of it matters, not merely the parts that prop up your narrative.

He was talking about how many more pilots would be needed at Delta with Southwest's contract. It is relevant in relation to whether the Delta pilots should have to accept any concessions.

So you admit at least 4000. Now you are coming around. Now what would you apply to their vacation trip touching in line bidding. Delta only gives you 3:15 credit. Are you saying that wouldn't increase the Delta pilot group either?

As for the 4000 number at Delta Connection, that is the pilots required under subpar regional work rules. Apply Delta work rules and you are closer to 5000+.

That's just DCI. We keep buying airlines and signing JVs remember. The reality is we are a conglomerate. The only way to benefit from the conglomerate is to share in its profits. The other thousands of pilots flying Delta passengers work for Richard Branson and some guy named Shaoyong Liu.

Honest question. (Keep in mind, I haven't seen any language of "scope gives" yet. Just a bunch of blind, gibberish-filled bullet points from Jerry.)

You wouldn't make a compromise for more mainline flying, leading to more mainline pilots, to include less DCI flying/jets/pilots, to make a deal with Mgmt.?

Do you have such disdain for anything Delta (Mgmt.)? Disdain for getting a deal, that ultimately benefits this pilots group? Or just such a subterranean lack of how negotiations and compromises during negotiations work, that you wouldn't trade a $5 bill for the company's $100 bill?

We wouldn't be dealing with that if you guys hadn't have screwed up so bad last year...

Meanwhile Gerry threw out the number 8000. He just throws stuff out there hoping something is correct trying to promote his DPA agenda.

WN pilots fly wayyyy more block hours per pilot by the way. Those guys work freaking hard, even with trips touching.

Jerry's numbers are exaggerated, maybe for effect, but they're still wrong. He will never prove his numbers or show his math when called out on it, and loses the message with constant unsubstantiated rumors. Frankly, it has gotten old. I have NEVER been a fan of Doesn't Provide Anything for its membership, but Jerry just helps solidify the decision.

The 50s are gone. They are getting something for nothing in that trade. No thanks, stand firm and that will all come to mainline as the business model fails.

Sounds infraction worthy to me 80! ;) Let's see if Dalpa brings us a TA that sells itself. After the failed TA, they are due for a victory.

Ha! excellent effort! Elliott has had his wrist slapped plenty of times by me. 😁 I'll call that one a ball.

Agreed about the TA!

Like I said, I haven't seen the (Scope) language the company is proposing. I wouldn't disagree with your statement of "50's going away", but let's be intellectually honest with ourselves for a moment.

You would wait five years for them to be completely obsolete, when you could have it done in half the time, with more pay, more seniority (e.g. more pilots on the seniority list below you), and a few more 76-seat jets which will STILL, eventually be at mainline anyway? (Purely hypothetical)

I edited it out. No infraction given. :) Although innocuous by itself we don't need to start down that road. I edited some of Jerry's posts and reminded him of what is expected of posters and he responded very graciously and has been posting very responsibly ever since.

Scoop

I hope my emoticon suggested the TIC nature of my little joke. I do appreciate the tone on this forum, while still talking passionately about our ideas and thoughts.

You just spamming with the same claims on multiple threads with no support or backing?

Seems like that.

Please see my questions in the other post and respond when you have time with facts.

Shillin'

Shillin'

Shillin' for the D P A

What are you talking about?

Me?

No. Jerry.

Oh.

I'll let him answer that.

But if he can convince us the objective facts are with him I will follow. But so far I see nothing but bluster.

Come on, Prof. (A little 2+2=4 action here.)

It's widely know that Jerry (a.k.a. gzsg) is Doesn't Provide Anything Club's biggest cheerleader.

You think he's gonna answer any of it? He will fart in a two man cockpit and blame dALPA.

Like the commercial. "It's what he does" (sic)

That is not my point at all.

We just have to compare apples to apples.

Some are saying SWA did us no favors. The fact is their PWA would add more than a billion per year to our costs.

Tired of the constant lowering of expectations.

Explain why United, UPS, FedEx and SWA pilots got deals and made no concessions.

We have seriously degraded sick leave. Written a blank check for virtual basing. Forced Self funding VEBA on all Delta pilots.

Now scope.

The American and United union leaders both made it completely clear to everyone in their management day 1 that scope was off the table.

The DCI 70/76 seat fleet is twice the size of any of our fleets. Let's give them more!

Come on 80. Put costs to scope concessions.

Or do they cost us nothing?

Because you are lying to the pilots about basic facts.

UAL: concessions were baked in from bankruptcy.
FedEx: there were work rule concessions including changing a big money DH item amongst others.
UPS: made concessions to get their rates. call it what you will, they were efficiency gains for the company.
SWA: also made concessions and went five plus years for a deal.

So you want to revisit those?

Jerry, you often times fly with a good friend of mine in DTW. Overall, I think you're a good person too, with your heart in the right place, but somehow your passionate message gets skewed by lack of factual data. I'm not sure why?

SWA didn't make concessions on code-share agreements? C'mon Jerry, you know better. Why do you post these things?

The union leaders at American and United instructed their negotiators they were not allowed to discuss scope during negotiations.

IMO the scope concessions we will make are severe and unnecessary.

Just my opinion.

The Donatelli JV scope settlement set a terrible precedent. Management after being brought into instant compliance can immediately move out of compliance and only fear tiny checks to all Delta pilots after a couple of more years.

Noncompliance needs to have immediate payments and penalties on par with the widebody positions lost.

The remedy must be in the contract.

Grievances are based on past practice. Donatelli harmed us beyond belief.

If there are no wide body jobs left after a concessionary JV scope or a scope clause ignored with little penalty, then yes bring on all the dci flying!

With our company making billions we should not have to give any concessions which includes increasing the number of large RJs!

Not sure the dci guys would want to work under our lack of QOL contract unless there was a future of wide body flying, but 18 777 at top pay affects how many pilots on the list and the rumored JV sellout equals how many more jobs?

After this contract we will have nothing left to give to get, so how will we negotiate in the future?

you said NO CONCESSIONS.

Its right up there.

Now you are talking about scope?

Lets tackle one of your misinformation pieces at a time please.

So, can you answer the lie you just put forth that NO airline who recently got a contract had to give up anything?

1st: DPA=USAPA Part II

2nd: Scope Concessions....how is reducing DCI airframes and available seats with mainline block hour protections severe? Also, prove widebody jobs were lost due to the JV Scope non compliance. Prove that widebody flying weren't moved to more profitable theatres.

Yeah, you're right. I guess the company decided to pay $30mil out of the goodness of their heart.