New flaw in TA scope
#151
Didn't United have ratio's prior to 911? How did that turn out for them in the end?
If you can't hold onto the number of 70/76 seaters now (in good times) do you really thing you'll hold onto those ratios in bad times?
If you can't hold onto the number of 70/76 seaters now (in good times) do you really thing you'll hold onto those ratios in bad times?
#152
denny i can answer this one right now, the oter i want to show some math.
you say "with this logic, you will never vote in favor of any contract because you don't believe it will be enforced and we will given them relief on anything. If that's the case, why haven't we just bent over backwards and give the company more 76ers now? They clearly want them, what has stopped us from just giving them more under the current contract?"
first, remember section 1 is seperate from 2-28, at least imho. so wins, and losses, in 2-28 have no bearing on 1. make all the advances and hold all the lines elsewhere means nothing if we outsource where it hurts us most.
what i'm saying is if you concede in section 1 where it matters, more jumbo rj's, why should I believe we won't concede on ratios that compare dci bh to mainline (767ER or larger) bh?
Second, as to why aren't we giving up more 76ers now? We're allowing them to hit triples on scope erosion. If we allow them to hit home runs people will notice the fireworks. Right now they've got a pathfinder TA allowing them to see what they can get away with in terms of scope, pay and work rules.
I'm sure they're excited about 2015 triples. Unless they decide a protracted section 6 is a bigger win.
you say "with this logic, you will never vote in favor of any contract because you don't believe it will be enforced and we will given them relief on anything. If that's the case, why haven't we just bent over backwards and give the company more 76ers now? They clearly want them, what has stopped us from just giving them more under the current contract?"
first, remember section 1 is seperate from 2-28, at least imho. so wins, and losses, in 2-28 have no bearing on 1. make all the advances and hold all the lines elsewhere means nothing if we outsource where it hurts us most.
what i'm saying is if you concede in section 1 where it matters, more jumbo rj's, why should I believe we won't concede on ratios that compare dci bh to mainline (767ER or larger) bh?
Second, as to why aren't we giving up more 76ers now? We're allowing them to hit triples on scope erosion. If we allow them to hit home runs people will notice the fireworks. Right now they've got a pathfinder TA allowing them to see what they can get away with in terms of scope, pay and work rules.
I'm sure they're excited about 2015 triples. Unless they decide a protracted section 6 is a bigger win.
Last edited by forgot to bid; 05-31-2012 at 08:37 AM.
#153
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,823
Likes: 169
From: window seat
Not to mention giving up 99.9Klbs jets at non union, won't hire furloughed DL pilots unless they resign DPJ? Those are OUR jets and OUR flying. We OWN that. We need to be doing that flying and working to capture 100% of DPJ flying, not letting it grow at the top end.
#154
denny i can answer this one right now, the oter i want to show some math.
you say "with this logic, you will never vote in favor of any contract because you don't believe it will be enforced and we will given them relief on anything. If that's the case, why haven't we just bent over backwards and give the company more 76ers now? They clearly want them, what has stopped us from just giving them more under the current contract?"
first, remember section 1 is seperate from 2-28, at least imho. so wins, and losses, in 2-28 have no bearing on 1. make all the advances and hold all the lines elsewhere means nothing if we outsource where it hurts us most.
what i'm saying is if you concede in section 1 where it matters, more jumbo rj's, why should I believe we won't concede on ratios that compare dci bh to mainline (767ER or larger) bh?
you say "with this logic, you will never vote in favor of any contract because you don't believe it will be enforced and we will given them relief on anything. If that's the case, why haven't we just bent over backwards and give the company more 76ers now? They clearly want them, what has stopped us from just giving them more under the current contract?"
first, remember section 1 is seperate from 2-28, at least imho. so wins, and losses, in 2-28 have no bearing on 1. make all the advances and hold all the lines elsewhere means nothing if we outsource where it hurts us most.
what i'm saying is if you concede in section 1 where it matters, more jumbo rj's, why should I believe we won't concede on ratios that compare dci bh to mainline (767ER or larger) bh?
Do you know this joke?
A wealthy man walks into a bar asks a beautiful woman at a bar if he she'd sleep with him for a million dollars. She says yes. Then he says, well, I don't have a million dollars so how about $200? She balks: "What do you think I am, a *****?"
He says, "We've already established that. Now we are just negotiating the price!"
He says, "We've already established that. Now we are just negotiating the price!"
Prostitute analogies.
#155
I be gone until saturday evening. Might be able to check back tomorrow.I usually go over rocks that get spit out into glass doors. DOH!

Denny
#156
then all hell breaks lose when I get the weed eater.
I'm done btw. will try to answer your first question here in a moment.
#157
Denny
#158
denny i can answer this one right now, the oter i want to show some math.
you say "with this logic, you will never vote in favor of any contract because you don't believe it will be enforced and we will given them relief on anything. If that's the case, why haven't we just bent over backwards and give the company more 76ers now? They clearly want them, what has stopped us from just giving them more under the current contract?"
first, remember section 1 is seperate from 2-28, at least imho. so wins, and losses, in 2-28 have no bearing on 1. make all the advances and hold all the lines elsewhere means nothing if we outsource where it hurts us most.
what i'm saying is if you concede in section 1 where it matters, more jumbo rj's, why should I believe we won't concede on ratios that compare dci bh to mainline (767ER or larger) bh?
Second, as to why aren't we giving up more 76ers now? We're allowing them to hit triples on scope erosion. If we allow them to hit home runs people will notice the fireworks. Right now they've got a pathfinder TA allowing them to see what they can get away with in terms of scope, pay and work rules.
I'm sure they're excited about 2015 triples. Unless they decide a protracted section 6 is a bigger win.
you say "with this logic, you will never vote in favor of any contract because you don't believe it will be enforced and we will given them relief on anything. If that's the case, why haven't we just bent over backwards and give the company more 76ers now? They clearly want them, what has stopped us from just giving them more under the current contract?"
first, remember section 1 is seperate from 2-28, at least imho. so wins, and losses, in 2-28 have no bearing on 1. make all the advances and hold all the lines elsewhere means nothing if we outsource where it hurts us most.
what i'm saying is if you concede in section 1 where it matters, more jumbo rj's, why should I believe we won't concede on ratios that compare dci bh to mainline (767ER or larger) bh?
Second, as to why aren't we giving up more 76ers now? We're allowing them to hit triples on scope erosion. If we allow them to hit home runs people will notice the fireworks. Right now they've got a pathfinder TA allowing them to see what they can get away with in terms of scope, pay and work rules.
I'm sure they're excited about 2015 triples. Unless they decide a protracted section 6 is a bigger win.
My point was that if you don't believe the union will enforce section one, THE most important section of our contract, why do would you think they would enforce the other sections? To me it's an all or nothing. Either they will enforce the entire contract or not.
I gotta go! Sorry to "debate and run."

Denny
#159
If scope keeps deteriorating as it has over the last 10 - 15 yrs, I wouldn't be surprised to see DAL (and other legacies), within 20 years, flying nothing but international routes. ALL other flying will be done by the rj carriers.
Dont believe me, look how the rj's have grown over the last 15 yrs.........
Got to draw a line in the sand somewhere, and that somewhere is where we are now!
........................ thinking, or sweating, out loud....................
Dont believe me, look how the rj's have grown over the last 15 yrs.........

Got to draw a line in the sand somewhere, and that somewhere is where we are now!
........................ thinking, or sweating, out loud....................
#160
as soon as i finish cutting grass i'll respond. one hand typing aint easy when slow jamming the news and trying not run over tennis balls, toys and dog bones.
I usually go over rocks that get spit out into glass doors.
I usually go over rocks that get spit out into glass doors.
i hit stuff that goes into my legs. mulch hurts.
then all hell breaks lose when I get the weed eater.
then all hell breaks lose when I get the weed eater.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post


one hand typing aint easy when slow jamming the news and trying not run over tennis balls, toys and dog bones.
