OTOH I do think we're cutting way too much. Cutting Athens only to see a maniacal, dellusional, dual subsidized foreign carrier pounce on it with a 777 (code sharing with an ULCC that we're also gifting capacity to so they can stay in endless growth mode) is an epic fail on the part of our management and there will be more to come. Look at their order books as well as the ULCC's here. We need to go to the mat for our market share or we will lose in the long run and lose badly. Our present vector is unsustainable and based on fear, weakness and short term trophy numbers at the expense of a more viable future as the fierce competitor we need to be.

Well, you promised to answer my questions when I answered yours. I guess my quick math was 0.21% off yours, sorry.

Now will you answer the questions I posed about your slides. I see you want to talk about anything else, but you promised to answer my questions.

1. Why did you assume a staffing ratio of less than 3 crews per aircraft when you made your DPA talking points slides? We have no aircraft that are staffed that low, in fact you are about 50% low. The company's actual plan is 5.5 for MD-90 and 7.0 for 717. How did you come up with those numbers? Was it based on some analysis or did you just shoot low to deceive people?
2. Why did you assume that reserve flying would increase by 80% from winter to summer? The actual shift in total flying is 13% and the historical difference in reserve flying is about 1.5%. How did you come up with 80%? Was it based on any analysis you did or did you just fudge the numbers to deceive people with your DPA slides?

I am really interested, because you created these slides, that are all based on false analysis. They were widely spread by DPA. Did you even attempt to provide the truth, or were you just trying to scare people into voting no?

I await your reply, you promised.

Not sure how off subject this might be, but we have all been focused with a merger down the line domestically, but what are the chances that we may be possibly looking to merger with a foreign carrier?

Not sure what type of regulatory hoops both companies would need to jump through, and I'm not even sure if it is even feasible.

The TA forbids DAL from supporting a foreign entity from purchasing us, but not from DAL purchasing a foreign entity/carrier.

If it happens it happens. That shouldn't be our concern. Which pilots get to do the flying...now THAT should be our concern.

So which pilots would get to do the flying?

More importantly. What in the TA dutifully protects us or binds DAL to commit its pilots to performing any flying?

Also does our labor law transcend boarders? Can you make that happen in a CBA/PWA, or does it have to be regulatory and not just with the US government?

Being foreign carriers could make RJ whipsaw look like child's play.

It could, and we need to prepare for that. However I'm not too worried about the labor laws in the EU countries or Canada. Anyway US airlines have bases overseas. It can be done, we just have to force the issue contractually. Now, before its happened, is by far the best time to get such protections from the company, when they are 100% free. If the company balks, we know their intentions.

Read Sections 1C, 1D8, and 1E 3. and tell me what you think?

Read Sections 1C, 1D8, and 1E3.

I've read them. My point is that our PWA and US labor law only dutifly bind DAL, not a foreign entity. Our labor law cannot be used for foreign pilots.


I do wonder if it can be used by a foreign holding company that DAL has a majority, or majority minority stake in. I do understand the foreign ownership percentage triggering mechanisms in place in the PWA, but there still seems to be some latitude there.