gloopy

Well a semi-recent DFR issue came dangerously close to happening just because we have a scope clause. Do we really think that it will go unchallenged if we are flying ASA planes, perhaps even on the ASA certificate, perhaps with ASA FA's and dispatchers, reporting to our ASA CP's, at the top of the seniority list, and no one is going to sue? That is a Joe Merchant wet dream for a seniority land grab moonshot, even if it involves "new and larger" planes.

And besides the potential legal challenges, do we really think its wise to erode our scope clause further to allow management to chop up our entire seniority list (and airline) into perhaps multipile regional certificates (many which fly for other airlines) for our mainline narrowbody planes? Just so we can hopefuly fly (and allegedly finance) the new "hundred seater"?

You are right that unity is important. But to many unity only comes after they win the seniority lottery..or at least take a shot at it. We need all our flying on our list. That must come with an iron clad prenup that guarantees no seniority land grab against any of our pilots. There is also no way we should pay for longevity like you previously suggested so that every single mainline "new hire" pilot comes over at year 12 scale. That would be insanely expensive and would have to be "paid for" by us 100%. No way. That said, we (and everyone else) need to do away with our 2 year B scale and make first year pay the same as 3rd year pay minus a few percent. But not "flow up to 12 year pay and bennies" which would be rediculous because that windfall would come out of all our hides.

There is a battle being planned for the 100 seat segment. It is the missing link right now, because of management product failings and union scope failings. But they intend on getting them if they can. I think we need to fly them here as opposed to farming them out to the likes of Mesa, Trans States, SKYW, ASA or any rediculous third party "air group" labor busting, ace dealing, win the next RFP by any means necessary group of outsource providers.

We need to bring 100% of the 70-76 seaters in house, and maybe that can be done with some kind of a bridge agreement like that since those are already fully outsourced anyway. But our seniority list must not be tampered with in any way to make that happen (other than future new hire positions on the bottom of said list as new hires). The only way I see to make that happen is preferential hiring or a flow thorough, and even those need to be handled carefully. But to give up even more scope and even bigger airplanes in the hopes that we and our epic fail lawyers that didn't even think about the old separate certificate trick can craft some nebulous multipile airline seniority list puts everything at risk. To do it just so that our company can get fake debt relief on paper only just seems like a massive risk we shouldn't take.

I also don't think we should bow down in fear and start gutting our scope in the name of strengthening our scope just to fly airplanes in a seat range we already own. Gutting our entire airline to allow an even larger segment to be flown at outsource providers is flat out playing with fire.

Free Bird

That's so accurate it's scary.

johnso29

So who has been talking about relieving scope? It seems people feel that it's already happened, we haven't even entered Sec 6 yet.

Schwanker

We don't need new widebodies...AF/KLM have plenty with more on the way!

gloopy

Exactly. Our battle cry for C12K should be SWA pay for small narrow body planes is the starting floor, significant scope recapture is mandatory, Alaska and AF are growing like gangbusters while we shrink just to stroke off the "capacity discipline" crackberry gamblers and our bankruptcy work rules need significant restoration. Oh, and COLA IS NOT A RAISE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We should not tolerate any manager or union patsy who tries to peddle the snake oil of "a raise over the life of" that doesn't fully back out all expected cost of living increases of at least 5-10% per year. That is a financial headwind that must be fully accounted for FIRST just to have a zero raise break even contract extension. Only money above that is a "raise" and even then every penny below SWA isnt a raise but low cost carrier parity.

9-11 is over and the company should have gotten that memo by now.

Further chopping up our seniority list for bigger aircraft so they can play fake phony financial trickery is a path we really shouldn't be going down.

sailingfun

Where do you get this stuff? Alaska had a major pulldown in 2008 and 2009. They are growing now but calling it gangbusters is quite a stretch.

"""The carrier's president, Brad Tilden, told analysts today that Alaska is planning to offer by 1 April 2012 all furloughed pilots the option of returning to work. He says the pilots, which are represented by the Air Line Pilots Association and signed a new contract in 2009, will be the last group of furloughed employees at Alaska to be fully recalled.
Alaska requires more pilots as the carrier continues to pursue modest mainline growth. Three new Boeing 737-800s will be added to the fleet this year. The fleet will grow by another three aircraft next year as six 737-800s are delivered and three older 737s are retired."""


Gangbusters? They might get all their furloughed guys back next year!


As far as AirFrance and their gangbuster growth?




""""Bruce Barnard | Sep 6, 2011 3:02PM GMT
The Journal of Commerce Online - News Story

• Cargo Airlines |
• International Air |
• Air + Expedited

Impact of cost cutting initative on Franco-Dutch carriers' cargo unit unclear


Air France-KLM is launching a new round of cost cuts, including a hiring freeze and deeper capacity reductions, as the European airline group moves to preserve profitability amid deteriorating conditions Europe and the United States.""""


We can only wish AirFrance was having Gangbuster growth. We have a outstanding joint venture agreement. If they are getting gangbuster growth on anything involving the joint venture then we are getting it also!!!
In July KLM, Delta and AirFrance met and portioned out the capacity cuts to comply with that agreement. In fact that is why we are picking up ORD-CDG.

DAL 88 Driver

That's one of the best descriptions of the problem I've ever seen. And "capacity discipline crackberry gamblers?"... brilliant and spot on!

Oh and it's not C12K (or at least I hope not). That would mean we have just under 10,000 years to go!

Again. Spot on!

Problem is that our MEC hasn't even gotten the memo yet! Listening to them, you'd think not only is 9-11 over but that we've actually recovered a lot since then. And the company is never going to "get the memo" if our MEC continues to act and communicate like this. Here is but one very sad example:

"The January 1 pay rate increase represents an increase of roughly $75 million in value for the Delta pilots. It also marks somewhat of a milestone in that the New Year pay rates will be above those that were in place when Delta filed for bankruptcy protection in 2005." - Lee Moak, Chairman's Letter, September 23, 2010

Bucking Bar

What are you talking about? What were the specifics of this alleged DFR issue, what were the claims made and the factual background of those allegations? Was the Delta MEC, or Delta Air Lines a defendant?

Please be objective and historically accurate. Name the parties involved and how you arrived at your information.

Delta pilots have every right to negotiate exclusively with Delta management. This exclusive right is recognized by Delta management, ALPA and the National Mediation Board.

Bucking Bar

Compare revenue per seat mile corrected for inflation over the last 12 years.

Airlines have taken the savings they have extracted and lowered ticket prices to compete with one another.

georgetg

Sailing, that's info from Jan 2011,

From the Alaska Air 8-K SEC filing on Sept 13 2011:

Q3 Capacity +6%
Full Year Capacity planned +8-9% YOY

Adding 25 new Boeing 737-800 & 737-900ER.
Parking 3 737-400
Net gain of 21 jets out of 117 mainline AC.
Alaska Air will have a net 18% fleet growth in the next 4 Years

If DAL had plans to grow the fleet by 18% in the next 4 years:
It would mean adding net 130 jets to our fleet after subtracting out the parked planes.
The DAL fleet would go from 727 to 908 jets in the next four years.

As for the furloughs, you are right, Alaska has 19 guys on furlough.
The August bid had 36 vacancies.

By early next year Alaska plans on running 10-12 pilots a month.
Alaska plans to hire approx. 380 pilots in the next three years, thats about 25% gain in pilots, or somewhere around 20% after attrition...

Let me put that in perspective, if Delta were hiring a similar percentage of pilots, we would have 3000 new-hires in the next 3 years.

I would say thats Gangbusters growth, but your standards might differ. ;-)

Cheers
George

(I've backed out the AS Q400 and DAL RJs for the fleet comparison sake)