Search

Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

Delta's 76 Seat Pay

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-27-2012 | 08:32 AM
  #11  
Eric Stratton's Avatar
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,002
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by TOGA LK
Bill, a 90-seat jet is a mainline aircraft, at least it used to be.
Turbo props used to be mainline as well.....
Old 05-27-2012 | 08:37 AM
  #12  
ClutchCargo's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
From: Retired FDX MD11 Capt
Default

Originally Posted by HercDriver130
50 seat airplanes use to be mainline airplanes to....way back in the day...
The original mainliner:

1 seat!




Regards,
Clutch
Old 05-27-2012 | 11:12 PM
  #13  
tsquare's Avatar
No longer cares
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
Default

Originally Posted by Eric Stratton
Are you recapturing the 76 seater or just getting to the limit that was set in the contract and telling management that you'll fly any more than that?
The 76s aren't worth recapturing IMHO. The payrates wouldn't be worth it to mainline pilots.. unless we were hiring right into the left seat.

I don;t think we should allow any more at DCI.. but I wouldn't spend a nickle to get 'em on the property here.
Old 05-28-2012 | 04:42 AM
  #14  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by tsquare
The 76s aren't worth recapturing IMHO. The payrates wouldn't be worth it to mainline pilots.. unless we were hiring right into the left seat.

I don;t think we should allow any more at DCI.. but I wouldn't spend a nickle to get 'em on the property here.
That's unfortunate. Was it only 10 years ago Northwest flew the DC-9-10 at mainline with 12 in first and 60 in coach? Now you outsource a fleet of those (with 4 more seats and 1,000nm more range) in twice the numbers of any existing mainline fleet.
Old 05-28-2012 | 04:43 AM
  #15  
scambo1's Avatar
The Brown Dot +1
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
Default

Originally Posted by tsquare
The 76s aren't worth recapturing IMHO. The payrates wouldn't be worth it to mainline pilots.. unless we were hiring right into the left seat.

I don;t think we should allow any more at DCI.. but I wouldn't spend a nickle to get 'em on the property here.

I would....
Old 05-28-2012 | 05:18 AM
  #16  
tsquare's Avatar
No longer cares
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
Default

Originally Posted by scambo1
I would....
You won't have to fly 'em for $50/hour either.
Old 05-28-2012 | 05:23 AM
  #17  
Check Essential's Avatar
Works Every Weekend
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,506
Likes: 0
From: 737 ATL
Default

Originally Posted by Eric Stratton
Are you recapturing the 76 seater or just getting to the limit that was set in the contract and telling management that you'll fly any more than that?
My comment was mostly just rhetorical.
The scope hawks speak of recapturing small gauge flying. This TA proves that ALPA is not going to follow that path.
We have Embraer 190 and CRJ900 pay rates in our contract but that is just a symbolic gesture. Nobody really believes we are ever going to fly those jets.

Speculation and conjecture:
Moak and management got together during the early days of "constructive engagement" and agreed on the "two tiered industry" model back during the bankruptcy. His followers still control the Delta MEC administration. They think it is best that smaller jets be flown at separate "feeder" airlines. Management always wanted to do this but ALPA decided to officially go along.
They don't say it out loud but they believe outsourcing is good. I think the reasoning maybe goes something like this: Mainline "top end" wages and benefits are best preserved and increased by not trying to apply them to every pilot all the way down to the smallest jets. The RJs can not be flown profitably in large numbers if the pilots, flight attendants, mechanics, gate agents, etc. are making too much money. We would rather have a high paid mainline and a lower paid feeder system than to combine them all together and be forced to accept a wage and benefit structure that would support everything from RJs up to the 777s. With a two tier industry the mainline jobs will (eventually) be much more lucrative and the feeder jobs will be much more plentiful. The industry overall is larger and healthier and for individual pilots its almost like an apprenticeship system that unions have had for decades. The RJ guys serve their time and can eventually apply and move to mainline.

I don't really know, I'm just guessing and I probably didn't articulate that very well but it seems to be a possible explanation for why ALPA does what it does.
The RJ wages would be too much of a drag on the 747 wages if we try to have them all on the same pay table. The disparity would be too glaring. Better to have that $300/hour job available and not have it be directly compared to a $40/hour job.

Back to the neighborhood beer and barbecue circuit. I've gained 10 pounds this weekend. Today's festivities are at my house. Gotta fire up the grill.

Last edited by Check Essential; 05-28-2012 at 05:36 AM.
Old 05-28-2012 | 06:08 AM
  #18  
doin time
 
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
From: RJ Left
Default

$50/hr to fly it at mainline? Sounds crazy. Capts on the 50 seaters make $100/hr at my regional...
Old 05-28-2012 | 08:06 AM
  #19  
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,629
Likes: 0
From: 756 Left Side
Default

The CRJ900 is listed as 76 seats in a two class arrangement.
So, if you allow the increase of those aircraft at the DCI carriers due to Scope relaxation.. you are removing a potential aircraft that is on your mainline payscale.

Again, why would anyone ever vote YES on a contract proposal that allows for more larger aircraft to be operated at a Contract Carrier instead of your own seniority list?

Motch
Old 05-28-2012 | 11:13 AM
  #20  
TenYearsGone's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,039
Likes: 0
From: 7ERB
Default

Originally Posted by horrido27
The CRJ900 is listed as 76 seats in a two class arrangement.
So, if you allow the increase of those aircraft at the DCI carriers due to Scope relaxation.. you are removing a potential aircraft that is on your mainline payscale.

Again, why would anyone ever vote YES on a contract proposal that allows for more larger aircraft to be operated at a Contract Carrier instead of your own seniority list?

Motch
Lets HURRY UP!! We need to HURRY UP and give away larger aircraft, for a small raise. The time is of essence. Rush, Rush, Rush. In 3 years, we will slap ourselves and regret it, AGAIN!!

TEN
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Raidr17
Military
20
03-26-2014 12:45 PM
captain_drew
Flight Schools and Training
39
12-05-2012 08:29 AM
threeighteen
Southwest
48
12-15-2011 08:29 AM
brownie
Cargo
7
05-27-2009 06:50 PM
BNUT
Military
97
10-14-2008 04:11 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



Your Privacy Choices