DAL & NWA Pilots To Take Contract to Management on May 29th
#51
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: 757/767
Posts: 890
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
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
#52
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
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
#53
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,221
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!
#54
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!
#55
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
#56
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!
Carl
#57
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
And by the way, we've had a number of DC-9's come back from the desert shortly after being parked.
Carl
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,221
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
And by the way, we've had a number of DC-9's come back from the desert shortly after being parked.
Carl
#59
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
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
#60
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.
Carl
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post