Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Major (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/)
-   -   Total DCI Seats (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/67712-total-dci-seats.html)

dragon 05-29-2012 04:25 AM


Originally Posted by Scoop (Post 1199314)
Clamp,

Biggest problem with the whole outsourcing issue right there - there are no "real" caps.

No Scope Cap has actually stopped DCI growth. At times these so called CAPs have delayed growth until they could be contractually circumnavigated, either through "mis-interpretation" or mutual consent.

It would probably take at least three years for us to get to the new 76 "limit" and guess what happens then?

Scoop

You're absolutely right, there is no actual cap. We're just a MOU/LOA away from another release. Or for that matter, a little inaction, like our not defeating RAH under the current contract.

Free Bird 05-29-2012 05:19 AM

I realize that this TA reduces the number of DCI seats and airframes. Aren't the ASM's roughly the same though? In other words fewer seats are actually equivalent to the same available seat miles?

conquestdz 05-29-2012 05:45 AM


Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1199111)
Want them here at mainline? What would YOU fly it for? Without knowing what each airline's benefit package is worth to it's respective pilots, let's play a game, but we have to make an assumption. Let's say that mainline's benefits package is worth 25% more than DCI's. Would that be fair? IT would mean that in order to compare payrates, we would have to subtract 25% from DCIs payrates in order to make them cost neutral to come to mainline. Ready...? A 7 year captain at Comair makes $79/hour. Care to do the math and tell me if we could fly them on mainline for that?

This is small potatoes in the big scheme of things. They will be capped... there is no reason to ever revisit that.. and it rids ous of 50s. There is too much obsession here.

As an outsider that flys 76 seat jets with Delta painted on the side, I would much rather have those airframes at Delta, even if the pay scale stinks. It would certainly be better to have the Delta work rules and benefits, but the real thing would be the career progression. I don't like always looking over my shoulder, waiting for the next sham regional bankruptcy or to be underbid by the next blowjet. I know the primary focus of your contract negotiations has to be what is best for you guys, but don't forget that what you do here has an effect on thousands of others that don't work for Delta.

MrBojangles 05-29-2012 02:09 PM

Posted this question in the latest and greatest, but nobody answered.

Pinnacle’s bankruptcy underlies growing weakness of US regional carriers | CAPA

why would Delta finance and extend the contract until 2022 for 142 CRJ200's at Pinnacle? My guess is so they can swap them out 2:1 to get the CRJ9's at pinnacle with a new cut rate crew cost. 142/2=71 so it makes sense to me. They're using this in my opinion to make it look like a scope win and this was their plan all along. These CRJ2's could have just gone away at this point.

KC10 FATboy 05-29-2012 02:45 PM


Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 1198988)
The 50 seaters will be gone by 2022ish.

Anderson has stated that when he buys an airplane, he plans on it staying around for 30 years. The 900's are much more viable and "mainline quality" type aicraft.

So, while I agree that DCI is smaller, we are enabling DCI to maintain a higher mass for longer by this agreement. In essence, trading 190 short term planes for 70 long term aircraft.


______


Taking this a bit further:

My major beef with this portion is the amount of jumbo RJs allowed. When I was briefed on this concept, I could have swallowed 30 or even 40 gain in exchange for the 50 seaters- but only about 75 50-seaters allowed to remain. Let them have a little bit more viability while reducing their mass significantly vice marginally. Everything in this TA is taken to the limit of what I could tolerate, and then over the edge into ridiculousness:

70 more Large RJs? Wayy too many while allowing too many smaller gauge jets to remain.

RAH fixed, but carved out for RAH forever with no sunset.

The pay?? Considerably lower than survey guidance and well below my limit. I don't see how you who gave so much in bankruptcy are not downright insulted.

DC- 1%... The pension was taken in BK and we only get one more 1% in the first section 6 after it?



I'll stop here, because these just illustrate my point that this thing wreaks of seeing how little they could get away with and possibly still get a pass.


Originally Posted by slowplay (Post 1199002)
OK, so I get that logic and it's a fair point. The new large RJ's would keep DCI around 3-4 years longer if airframe longevity determines their viability. The 70 seaters on average have a 15-17 year contractual life with DCI, so I think 30 is a bit optimistic for that space.

BINGO !!! People are finally starting to get it.

These new 76 seaters are going to be with us for a much longer time.

Economics has sentenced the 50 seaters to death. Even RA is on record admitting it.

So why would you want to keep RJs around longer, giving them newer shiny new jets?

Oh yeah, so we can get used 717s that nobody wants. Nevermind. :rolleyes:

gloopy 05-29-2012 02:56 PM


Originally Posted by KC10 FATboy (Post 1200329)
BINGO !!! People are finally starting to get it.

These new 76 seaters are going to be with us for a much longer time.

Economics has sentenced the 50 seaters to death. Even RA is on record admitting it.

So why would you want to keep RJs around longer, giving them newer shiny new jets?

Oh yeah, so we can get used 717s that nobody wants. Nevermind. :rolleyes:

That's why I said you can tell they management is lying by the lack of a sunset/expiration in the large RJ's. They want a permanent fleet of outsourced large RJ's with mainline CASM and turnkey profitability. 70 and especially 90 seaters are long term career killers that will never, ever go away. 50 seaters are very costly place fillers and are self expiring. No wonder they want to make a trade.

DLpilot 05-29-2012 02:59 PM


Originally Posted by KC10 FATboy (Post 1200329)
BINGO !!! People are finally starting to get it.

These new 76 seaters are going to be with us for a much longer time.

Economics has sentenced the 50 seaters to death. Even RA is on record admitting it.

So why would you want to keep RJs around longer, giving them newer shiny new jets?

Oh yeah, so we can get used 717s that nobody wants. Nevermind. :rolleyes:

+1
We are making the threat of DCI more long term now. Replacing worn out POS planes with new ones that passengers love. Most passenegrs cannot tell the difference between a EMB175 and a 737. They hate the little cramped 50 seaters. We are giving them mainline similar airplanes...brand spankin new. Come on people...DCI is turning into mainline but without our pilots!

DAL73n 05-29-2012 03:20 PM


Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 1200337)
That's why I said you can tell they management is lying by the lack of a sunset/expiration in the large RJ's. They want a permanent fleet of outsourced large RJ's with mainline CASM and turnkey profitability. 70 and especially 90 seaters are long term career killers that will never, ever go away. 50 seaters are very costly place fillers and are self expiring. No wonder they want to make a trade.

And while everyone is talking about fewer seats at DCI that is the thing that actually kills this deal. By trading profitable 76 seaters for 2.7 UNPROFITABLE 50 seaters then DAL will be able to meet the new block ratios without growing mainline (and in actuality shrinking mainline). Once again, we're negotiating ourselves right out of a job.

Jack Bauer 05-29-2012 03:27 PM

http://www.lynchbuslines.com/small_bus.jpg

http://www.wisoveg.de/bve/sichtungen...03/doppel2.jpg

Seems like a fair trade. Especially since the old little one needed an engine overhaul and tranny change. I was going to park my fleet of them anyway but wait, I am being allowed to replace these little, worn out ones with these bigger more efficient ones with premium seating? Seems fair to me. Thanks guys!

- Management

SSMR13 05-29-2012 04:34 PM

Regionals started as small turbo props, and it was because pay was associated with number of seats that pay was low, not because they were turbo props. As I recall, large turbo props were once flown by mainline. Today, the Q400, a 70+ seat turbo prop, flies all over the place for pay much less than that of an equivalent 70+ seat jet. Not only is it a regional aircraft now, but it is a turbo prop, so the pay gets a double whammy. Pay has somehow shifted from number of passengers carried to also look at the power plant used. What a scheme by management to further reduce pay.

In the mean time, regional jets grew from 35 seats, to 50 seats, to 76 seats, to 99 seats (Republic, sorry to have screwed the pooch on this one). And every time some argument was used with some imaginary cap on number of planes allowed. You limit the number of regional planes with 50 seats in them, and of course the word jet is applied, not aircraft, so now there are 50 more large, just as comfortable, turbo props flying around for you because you made an arrangement with management.

Delta pilots, I implore you, please do not make the mistake of allowing more large jets, turbo props, or 76 passenger gliders, balloons, etc, to be flown by regionals. Delta is not gonna keep those 50 seaters until 2024. Those f...ing things won't last that long. They are already falling apart. Customers hate them. They are loosing money by flying those things.

Do you really think you are winning by swapping 200 of them now for 70 more larger RJ's? Or do you think that the cap is real THIS TIME ;)

I fly for this POS operation called Republic, and I am trying to get out with all my might. Just for me, please don't allow them to get more flying. Please, don't fall for the BS that you are reducing the number of DCI seats. You would simply be swapping a ****ty RJ, one customers hate, for a really nice RJ, a brand new RJ, one customers really like.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:37 AM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands