More planes added....
06-20-2012 | 07:19 AM
#11
Line Holder
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 1
88 717s. Then subtract 200+ RJs, then add back 70 more. A net reduction of 148 RJs. Passing this TA will do that. Those additional 70 76 seat RJs and 102 70 seaters will undoubtably cover most of those 50 seaters leaving. But 88 717s coming to the fleet would be a good thing, and they could recapture a lot of the old 737-200 and 727 routes that were given away after 9-11 and the BK.
06-20-2012 | 07:44 AM
#12
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,007
Likes: 0
From: Space Shuttle PIC
You mean parking a lot more RJs than are coming over? You guys seem to forget that something will replace the 200+ RJs that will leave. Many of their routes will stay, but now those 102 70 seaters will take the vacant 50 seater routes, essentially upguaging the route. Then you forget about the 717s. Yes, 21 DC9s will be replaced, but that means an additional 67 717s will takeover plenty of current CR9 and E175 routes that are doing well. Again, that is upguaging. So, we finally get that "mythical" 100 seater to recapture those routes that were lost after our BKs, along with a ratio that favors mainline. Throw in a 19.7% raise for a short 3 year contract, and that's pretty good. Better than a "hunch" of supposed leverage.
06-20-2012 | 07:49 AM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
From: A somewhere
Here's an idea, let the company decide what airplane flies where. We should be flying them. All 70+ seat airplanes.
I know this is not a new idea but the simplicity is good for the company and us as pilots. This TA is similar to the tax code in being entirely too complex; hence inefficient for both parties.
I know this is not a new idea but the simplicity is good for the company and us as pilots. This TA is similar to the tax code in being entirely too complex; hence inefficient for both parties.
06-20-2012 | 08:00 AM
#14
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,007
Likes: 0
From: Space Shuttle PIC
And there will never be replacements? We will only downsize and keep 325 large RJs? MD90s are coming, and eventually there could be 737 Max or A320 NEOs orders. Is that a hunch? Just like you saying older mainline will be parked someday, but not knowing when. Eventually there will probably be 3 total legacies and a few LCCs. There will be pressure to keep domestic flying a priority to compete with the other legacies. Obviously we are interested in smaller markets if DL is interested in 717s.
06-20-2012 | 08:06 AM
#15
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,007
Likes: 0
From: Space Shuttle PIC
Here's an idea, let the company decide what airplane flies where. We should be flying them. All 70+ seat airplanes.
I know this is not a new idea but the simplicity is good for the company and us as pilots. This TA is similar to the tax code in being entirely too complex; hence inefficient for both parties.
I know this is not a new idea but the simplicity is good for the company and us as pilots. This TA is similar to the tax code in being entirely too complex; hence inefficient for both parties.
06-20-2012 | 08:17 AM
#16
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
Plese explain that 70+ seat mainline operation. Will there be only mainline pilots, and DCI FAs and mechanics? How about the ramp? Mainline usually pays a lot more with benefits. That would be cost prohibitive compared to the cheap regional feed we have today. Again, explain how you would do it please.
How again do you justify not outsourcing the 717? Imagine your profit sharing check with that one?
06-20-2012 | 11:16 AM
#19
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 23,286
Likes: 0
From: Light Chop
You know maybe we should have a clause that says if we have pay rates established for an aircraft model then those rates apply to any outsourced airline operating on behalf of Delta Air Lines.
Let's raise the bar... for Bar.
Let's raise the bar... for Bar.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
