Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major
Hey DELTA, if you want more 70 seaters... >

Hey DELTA, if you want more 70 seaters...

Search
Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

Hey DELTA, if you want more 70 seaters...

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-31-2012, 11:21 AM
  #31  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Posts: 354
Default

Originally Posted by Scoop View Post
CW,

If its any consolation it looks like the Scope line will hold at 76 seats at Delta.

Scoop
I imagine the pilots that voted out the 30, 44, 50, and 70 seat planes thought the same thing.
mynameisjim is offline  
Old 05-31-2012, 11:45 AM
  #32  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2012
Posts: 344
Default

Originally Posted by ColdWhiskey View Post
Fly Them At Mainline!!

Why aren't you guys/gals insisting on this, instead of selling more scope? (Bring the jobs back to mainline and your advancement will be much quicker.)
Don't worry to much about RJ's being flown by delta pilots at mainline. This will happen probably in the next 24 months. What is going to happen? Well, I do believe that Delta management will just purchase a regional pilot group and welcome them to Delta. Seat lock them in the RJ for a few years and then all RJ's will be flown by Delta pilots. Problem solved....
Kilroy is offline  
Old 05-31-2012, 11:59 AM
  #33  
Gets Weekends Off
 
vprMatrix's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 243
Default

Originally Posted by Kilroy View Post
Don't worry to much about RJ's being flown by delta pilots at mainline. This will happen probably in the next 24 months. What is going to happen? Well, I do believe that Delta management will just purchase a regional pilot group and welcome them to Delta. Seat lock them in the RJ for a few years and then all RJ's will be flown by Delta pilots. Problem solved....


Interesting first post.
vprMatrix is offline  
Old 05-31-2012, 12:07 PM
  #34  
Gets Weekends Off
 
shiznit's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: right for a long, long time
Posts: 2,642
Default

Originally Posted by mynameisjim View Post
I imagine the pilots that voted out the 30, 44, 50, and 70 seat planes thought the same thing.
You obviously have very little knowledge of the actual history and contents of scope clauses at the major airlines.....
shiznit is offline  
Old 05-31-2012, 12:45 PM
  #35  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Posts: 354
Default

Originally Posted by shiznit View Post
You obviously have very little knowledge of the actual history and contents of scope clauses at the major airlines.....
I guess so. I've only been in the industry for 10 years, and in those 10 years I've seen nothing but growth at the regionals. All of those previous contracts had excuses, being an economic downturn and all. But the excuses for this latest round of outsourcing just don't make sense to a lowly RJ pilot like myself.
mynameisjim is offline  
Old 05-31-2012, 12:54 PM
  #36  
Super Moderator
 
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 6,874
Default

Originally Posted by Eric Stratton View Post
Can you expand on the first part? How did you not sell it or give it up?

The line may have been held at 76 seats but the amount of 70-76 seat planes continues to grow.


Not sure 76 seaters will grow - A No vote may stop this. True, the three for one would allow more 76 seaters but when you consider 70 seaters will have to parked (255 CAP on 70 +76 seaters) the large RJs will not really grow with a NO vote.

If we sold Scope what did we get for it? Scope is too complicated to accurately describe in a bumper sticker. Bad decisions go back decades and the final straw was in BK - I wouldn't really call that selling it.

ALPA and DALPA both have made many poor Scope descions - this is very obvious in hindsight. but I am not sure it was obvious back when they were making the decisions. 70 Seat Scope at DAL actually goes back to 1986. Before the RJ, Scope strictly limited seats and made no distinction between jets and Props. Along came the RJ and we have been playing catch up ever since.

PM me your E-mail address and I will send you a 5 page history of Scope at DAL written a few years ago be a C-44 guy.

Scoop
Scoop is offline  
Old 05-31-2012, 01:08 PM
  #37  
Super Moderator
 
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 6,874
Default

Originally Posted by mynameisjim View Post
I imagine the pilots that voted out the 30, 44, 50, and 70 seat planes thought the same thing.



Really? Not that we ever voted on 30 seat Scope, but if we did and the Pilots only allowed more 30 seaters, but no larger aircraft - what would be the Scope limit Now? Hint - 30 seats.

Repeat for 44, 50, and 70.

As a junior guy, 2000 hire, Scope is by far the most important issue to me. Problem is, our Scope already sucks so just saying No more RJs doesn't really work.

Scoop
Scoop is offline  
Old 05-31-2012, 04:45 PM
  #38  
Line Holder
 
PTCpilotDude's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Position: 73N Capt
Posts: 37
Default

Why are we trading 50 seat RJ's for 76 seat RJ's?? The 50 seat RJ's are toast! They are dead dinosaurs. We are fools if we think we are gaining by the "accellerated retirement" of 50 seats RJ's. They have been, and will continue to retire those, no matter wheather we ratify this TA or not.

Come on guys, a ~50% increase in 76 seat RJ's?

What happened to holding the line? NO MORE RJ's!

PTC
PTCpilotDude is offline  
Old 05-31-2012, 06:35 PM
  #39  
On Reserve
 
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: lazyboy
Posts: 24
Default

Hmm, what airline never furloughs and always makes a profit. How about not flying anything with less then a 100 seats because IT DOESN'T MAKE MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
alpo is offline  
Old 05-31-2012, 07:15 PM
  #40  
Mother’s finest
 
SawF16's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 73NB
Posts: 295
Default

Originally Posted by PTCpilotDude View Post
Why are we trading 50 seat RJ's for 76 seat RJ's?? The 50 seat RJ's are toast! They are dead dinosaurs. We are fools if we think we are gaining by the "accellerated retirement" of 50 seats RJ's. They have been, and will continue to retire those, no matter wheather we ratify this TA or not.

Come on guys, a ~50% increase in 76 seat RJ's?

What happened to holding the line? NO MORE RJ's!

PTC
I believe this has already been pointed out, but realistically what we are "trading" with regards to small jet scope in this TA is 50 seaters for 70 seaters. The company can already acquire more 76 seat JETS (not to mention unlimited 76 seat turboprops) than this TA allows. I completely agree with the notion that it will not be cost productive to convert the 70s to 76s in the short run, but make no mistake, it will happen eventually (say 6-9 years?) To me the benefits of reducing the allowable 76 seat count, capping the TOTAL outsourced count, and tying in currently nonexistent restrictions on the REAL future threats of geared turbofans and turboprops outweigh the negatives of allowing the company to up gauge their 50 seaters to 70 seaters at a 2 for 1 ratio. This combined with the mbh/dbh ratio (which apparently works quite well as a natural limiter in the case of United's 70 seaters) are pretty well thought out limits considering what we have now.

The issue I do have w the small jet scope is the enforcement of the ratios. There don't appear to be provisions for concrete penalties for failure to comply, other than a grievance ruled on by an arbitrator. If the ratios could be assured, I personally wouldnt give a damn if we allowed unlimited 76 seat jets. If the company wanted to buy 1000 of them and average 3 or so hours a day in them, they still would have to use Delta mainline pilots in far greater proportion than they are now.

All of the current RJ drivers pleading for DAL pilots to stop the outsourcing, be careful what you wish for. If this TA passes close to 1500 of your jobs will cease to exist. Some number of them will move to mainline, but i doubt it will be all.
SawF16 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Ferd149
Mergers and Acquisitions
117
11-08-2023 07:41 AM
Quagmire
Major
253
04-16-2011 06:19 AM
Sir James
Mergers and Acquisitions
2
04-14-2008 06:28 PM
JiffyLube
Major
12
03-07-2008 04:27 PM
RockBottom
Major
0
09-15-2006 09:50 AM

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