Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Pilot Lounge > Mergers and Acquisitions
DAL & NWA Pilots To Take Contract to Management on May 29th >

DAL & NWA Pilots To Take Contract to Management on May 29th

Notices
Mergers and Acquisitions Facts, rumors, and conjecture

DAL & NWA Pilots To Take Contract to Management on May 29th

Old 05-30-2008, 11:16 AM
  #51  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: 757/767
Posts: 890
Default

Originally Posted by newKnow View Post
Sailing,

Even though there has been no SLI yet, "you" is quickly becoming "we." Those 100 seat aircraft are something that is unique to the Legacy Carriers right now - (Except US Airways EMB-195's). If we were smart, we would be trying to keep them.

How many DC-9 would NWA have next year? I can't say for sure, but I doubt if they would park them all. This may sound funny, but people do have to get from Traverse City and Minot to the hubs you know and they pay big bucks to do it. No matter how much you like the MD-88 or the 737, I doubt that it make sense to take those airplanes into places like that.

The argument to keep the -9s is that there is no real replacement out there for them except the EMB-195. Is it cheaper to keep the -9s or buy a brand new multi million dollar aircraft? I'll let the bean counters make that determination. But, whatever they decide, we as a union should do whatever it takes to keep that flying for the mainline carriers.

I guess what I'm saying is that you should not assume that NWA is planning on parking all of the DC-9s. If they do, they will have to replace them. Which is good for all of us.

New K Now
Well put. I hope we can all commit to making sure that ANYTHING north of 76 seats will here and forevermore be flown by mainline pilots, at mainline rates, with mainline paint. He11, I'd be on board for getting the 70s' back (or in the first place). I pray we all learned the scope lessen of the last decade. And yes I held this view when I was a turbo prop and rj driver.
Deez340 is offline  
Old 05-30-2008, 11:44 AM
  #52  
Underboob King
 
Superpilot92's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Guppy Commander
Posts: 4,412
Thumbs up

Originally Posted by newKnow View Post
Sailing,

Even though there has been no SLI yet, "you" is quickly becoming "we." Those 100 seat aircraft are something that is unique to the Legacy Carriers right now - (Except US Airways EMB-195's). If we were smart, we would be trying to keep them.

How many DC-9 would NWA have next year? I can't say for sure, but I doubt if they would park them all. This may sound funny, but people do have to get from Traverse City and Minot to the hubs you know and they pay big bucks to do it. No matter how much you like the MD-88 or the 737, I doubt that it make sense to take those airplanes into places like that.

The argument to keep the -9s is that there is no real replacement out there for them except the EMB-195. Is it cheaper to keep the -9s or buy a brand new multi million dollar aircraft? I'll let the bean counters make that determination. But, whatever they decide, we as a union should do whatever it takes to keep that flying for the mainline carriers.

I guess what I'm saying is that you should not assume that NWA is planning on parking all of the DC-9s. If they do, they will have to replace them. Which is good for all of us.

New K Now
Great Post!! Couldnt agree more!!
Superpilot92 is offline  
Old 05-30-2008, 01:46 PM
  #53  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,221
Default

It would be great if they kept them. Sadly if you run even basic fuel numbers reality shows up in a hurry. The question for the union is how do we capture the follow on flying as the nines go away at the mainline. I am sure management wants that flying at Compass or another connection carrier. We have to fight to secure the replacement flying at the mainline. Its one of the reasons that a joint contract is going to take longer then most think!
sailingfun is offline  
Old 05-30-2008, 03:14 PM
  #54  
Underboob King
 
Superpilot92's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Guppy Commander
Posts: 4,412
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun View Post
It would be great if they kept them. Sadly if you run even basic fuel numbers reality shows up in a hurry. The question for the union is how do we capture the follow on flying as the nines go away at the mainline. I am sure management wants that flying at Compass or another connection carrier. We have to fight to secure the replacement flying at the mainline. Its one of the reasons that a joint contract is going to take longer then most think!
why would working together fighting for the same cause make a joint contract take longer? Both groups want to protect the mainline flying, seems like mutual concerns to me.
Superpilot92 is offline  
Old 05-30-2008, 03:22 PM
  #55  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun View Post
I don't know what you consider a rumor. You had 160 DC-9's 3 years ago. How many do you have today? How many did you have in Dec. How many will you have next Dec. Here is a article that is a little dated. A further reduction of 8 more nines was put out after this.

Since you don't seem to want to understand the concept of it being a rumor until the aircraft are actually parked, I've noticed that you don't post about how dangerous you think this merger is for DAL. I mean, as badly as you continually portray NWA, shouldn't you also warn DAL about the hazards of merging with such a stone-age airline?

And by the way, we've had a number of DC-9's come back from the desert shortly after being parked.

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 05-30-2008, 03:29 PM
  #56  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun View Post
It would be great if they kept them. Sadly if you run even basic fuel numbers reality shows up in a hurry
Really? Since you've run the numbers, care to post them here? And be sure you run the numbers on total cost of ownership given that they are paid for. Or...maybe you didn't run THOSE numbers.

Originally Posted by sailingfun View Post
The question for the union is how do we capture the follow on flying as the nines go away at the mainline. I am sure management wants that flying at Compass or another connection carrier. We have to fight to secure the replacement flying at the mainline. Its one of the reasons that a joint contract is going to take longer then most think!
Why should that issue make negotiations take longer than last time? DAL folks (especially you) have done nothing but wave the bloody shirt of DC-9 retirements from day 1, yet last time DALPA and NWALPA negotiated a joint agreement (minus SLI) in less than a week.

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 05-30-2008, 03:44 PM
  #57  
No longer cares
 
tsquare's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
Default

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler View Post
Since you don't seem to want to understand the concept of it being a rumor until the aircraft are actually parked, I've noticed that you don't post about how dangerous you think this merger is for DAL. I mean, as badly as you continually portray NWA, shouldn't you also warn DAL about the hazards of merging with such a stone-age airline?

And by the way, we've had a number of DC-9's come back from the desert shortly after being parked.

Carl
I don't think this is a dangerous merger for DAL... Do you Carl?
tsquare is offline  
Old 05-30-2008, 05:00 PM
  #58  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,221
Default

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler View Post
Since you don't seem to want to understand the concept of it being a rumor until the aircraft are actually parked, I've noticed that you don't post about how dangerous you think this merger is for DAL. I mean, as badly as you continually portray NWA, shouldn't you also warn DAL about the hazards of merging with such a stone-age airline?

And by the way, we've had a number of DC-9's come back from the desert shortly after being parked.

Carl
Carl, Excepting that 35 to 38 year old inefficient aircraft are going to be parked does not portray NWA in a bad light. Its a simply reality. I have listened in two lounge briefs where management has discussed the aircraft. They are history. There will not be a DC-9 in the fleet within 36 months of the merger. Aircraft get retired all the time. Its the nature of the beast. Before the Delta/NWA merger was even announced you guys were phasing them out fast. You had 160 less then 3 years ago. I think you have about 80 today and you are parking a couple each month. These are the oldest most fuel inefficient aircraft at any major airline. There is going to be a major domestic pull down of flying by all US airlines. Greater then what is already been put out. Delta had DC-9's that they retired in the early 90's because of maintenance costs and fuel burn. They just retired 54 737-200's all built after 1983 for the same reason. The 737's were replaced with E-170's. My point is that we need to focus on that not happening with the nines and making sure the replacement flying is recaptured by the mainline. The nines are gone. They were going when you were a standalone airline and they are going with the merger. Who gets the replacement flying is the question.
sailingfun is offline  
Old 05-30-2008, 06:26 PM
  #59  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by tsquare View Post
I don't think this is a dangerous merger for DAL... Do you Carl?
I am increasingly of the belief that it is not the right move for both airlines. I've listened to Gary Kelly, Bob Crandall, Gordon Bethune and other airline analysts, and they all express their fear of spending 1 Billion dollars on combining two companies from the cash coffers that should probably be carefully guarded in this environment. It's a lot of money to spend on painting airplanes and moving headquarters' etc. Long term, it is probably a good thing. But you don't get to live in the long term if you die in the short term.

Some awfully smart people are saying they would not do it at this time, and I find myself agreeing with a lot of their logic.

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 05-30-2008, 06:27 PM
  #60  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun View Post
Carl, Excepting that 35 to 38 year old inefficient aircraft are going to be parked does not portray NWA in a bad light. Its a simply reality. I have listened in two lounge briefs where management has discussed the aircraft. They are history. There will not be a DC-9 in the fleet within 36 months of the merger. Aircraft get retired all the time. Its the nature of the beast. Before the Delta/NWA merger was even announced you guys were phasing them out fast. You had 160 less then 3 years ago. I think you have about 80 today and you are parking a couple each month. These are the oldest most fuel inefficient aircraft at any major airline. There is going to be a major domestic pull down of flying by all US airlines. Greater then what is already been put out. Delta had DC-9's that they retired in the early 90's because of maintenance costs and fuel burn. They just retired 54 737-200's all built after 1983 for the same reason. The 737's were replaced with E-170's. My point is that we need to focus on that not happening with the nines and making sure the replacement flying is recaptured by the mainline. The nines are gone. They were going when you were a standalone airline and they are going with the merger. Who gets the replacement flying is the question.
You talk a great deal about things you do not know for certain. That is your right - but understand that is what you are doing. Only time will tell if your guesses are right.

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Adlerdriver
Cargo
39
03-11-2008 07:09 AM
freightguy
Major
39
12-13-2007 11:59 PM
RockBottom
Major
0
02-06-2006 11:43 AM
nw320driver
Major
1
11-16-2005 01:23 PM
RockBottom
Major
0
04-29-2005 07:26 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


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices