Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Pilot Lounge > Mergers and Acquisitions
Delta's Proposed Seniority List >

Delta's Proposed Seniority List

Notices
Mergers and Acquisitions Facts, rumors, and conjecture

Delta's Proposed Seniority List

Old 10-17-2008, 06:40 PM
  #41  
Gets Weekends Off
 
NWA320pilot's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 737 Capt
Posts: 1,166
Default

Originally Posted by acl65pilot View Post
Not mine but others that know a lot more than you or I do.

It is not my opinion whatsoever.

Boeing will make sure that we have the credit we need to purchase airplanes. They need to sell them, and will help us purchase them. Kind of like GMAC.
I have a friend who own a dealership and right now even with a FICO well above 700 an applicant needs at least 20% up front to be approved by GMAC..... Credit is tight and getting worse so the makers may not be up for the loan. But you guess is as good as mine.
NWA320pilot is offline  
Old 10-17-2008, 06:40 PM
  #42  
Super Moderator
 
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 6,851
Default

Originally Posted by Eric Stratton View Post
because the airplane doesn't fly as far and burns more gas is a pretty weak argument as to why it shouldn't be considered comparable. performance wise sure but not pay or seniority.

out of curiousity what is the 88's range vs. the 9's?
Using that logic why should the 787 pay so much?

Scoop
Scoop is offline  
Old 10-17-2008, 06:47 PM
  #43  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Eric Stratton's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,002
Default

Originally Posted by Check Essential View Post
The captains were slotted in with Delta 88 captains.
The FOs were the special case. Its not the captains who are in danger of furlough. They can always bid other equipment when the 9s go away. The FOs might not get that option.
That's why DALPA is trying so hard to protect the bottom 10% of our list. It would be fundamentally unfair to furlough Delta pilots because a bunch of NWA airplanes suddenly get retired.
If that's the new deltas plan is to park the 9's without replacement shouldn't delta pilots feel the brunt as well because nwa's plan wasn't to park them all. It sounds like with the merger it's new delta that wants to park them.

Has management given a reason as to why they want to park the 9? Under capcity, over lap, too expensive? The reason that I ask is, if the new management thought it best to retire the md88's instead of the 9 I don't think it would be right to furlough only delta's pilots for the parking of their airplane. It's a part of the new airline's plan and not either of the original airlines plan.

On a side note if any airplane can be replace by something at a regional then I think a furlough should start from the top down for not tightening scope under the combined contract.
Eric Stratton is offline  
Old 10-17-2008, 06:48 PM
  #44  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler View Post
You have no chance of backing up those statements with any evidence whatsoever. They are singularly your opinions. Trust me.

Carl
Originally Posted by acl65pilot View Post
Not mine but others that know a lot more than you or I do.

It is not my opinion whatsoever.

Boeing will make sure that we have the credit we need to purchase airplanes. They need to sell them, and will help us purchase them. Kind of like GMAC.
So this is what you call evidence? Do I need to tell you how persuasive your "evidence" would be in court? Or an arbitration?

You're entitled to your opinion, but that's all it is. You don't speak for Boeing, and you don't speak for Richard Anderson or any of his executive officers...Trust me on that.

I don't speak for them either, but at least I admit it.

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 10-17-2008, 06:53 PM
  #45  
Looking for a laugh
 
Justdoinmyjob's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,099
Default

Originally Posted by Eric Stratton View Post
If that's the new deltas plan is to park the 9's without replacement shouldn't delta pilots feel the brunt as well because nwa's plan wasn't to park them all. It sounds like with the merger it's new delta that wants to park them.
How do you know NW wasn't going to park them? They had already announced the reduction in the -9s a long time ago.
Justdoinmyjob is offline  
Old 10-17-2008, 06:59 PM
  #46  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by Superpilot92 View Post
nothing is going to "suddenly" happen to the DC9's your mgmt has even said they will at least me around till 2012. That's hardly suddenly.
Come on Super. Why would you do something so divisive as quote DAL management? If you keep this up, no Kool-Aid for you!

Originally Posted by Superpilot92 View Post
Your sides what-ifs don't constitute screwing 10% of the nwa pilots.
I'm confident that arbitrators will apply the same logic. Oops...now I'm being divisive.

Originally Posted by Superpilot92 View Post
Also dal's post merger plans weren't Nwa plans. Post merger has nothing to do with pre-merger "what-if's".
Hmmm...more flawless albeit divisive logic.

Originally Posted by Superpilot92 View Post
Fence them and problem solved, unless of course it has more to do with a seniority grab than crystal ball theories. The arbitrators will see through both sides bs "proposals".

We'll see
Well I hope you're happy...logic boy!

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 10-17-2008, 07:03 PM
  #47  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Eric Stratton's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,002
Default

Originally Posted by Scoop View Post
Using that logic why should the 787 pay so much?

Scoop
it's size...

are you making the argument that you should get more pay because of a better fuel burn? if so that's the first time I have ever heard that argument.
Eric Stratton is offline  
Old 10-17-2008, 07:07 PM
  #48  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by Scoop View Post
Carl,
I agree that as the price of oil goes down the DC-9's become more viable - good for all of us. I disagree with your credit argument for the following reasons:
*DAL recently secured another $1 Billion line of credit.
*Boeing is going to have to self finance its sales if the credit markets dry up.
*NW is chock full of unrestricted cash as you guys have been telling us for the last 6 months.
I wholeheartedly agree with the "place your bets" mentality - who knows what next year will look like?

Scoop
Here's the problem Scoop. The credit markets HAVE dried up. Whether they begin to flow again is anybody's guess - as you have correctly stated. Boeing does not finance aircraft purchases with its own internal cash reserves. Boeing accesses the commercial paper and longer term credit markets to do so, then charges customers a higher interest rate so they can make a little on the arbitrage. Same with GE, same with GMAC, etc. If there's extremely tight access to the paper and credit markets, Boeing can't finance anything unless they're willing to put at risk their own cash reserves.

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 10-17-2008, 07:10 PM
  #49  
Back on TDY
 
Carl Spackler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Default

Originally Posted by Justdoinmyjob View Post
How do you know NW wasn't going to park them? They had already announced the reduction in the -9s a long time ago.
How do you prove a negative?

How do you know Delta wasn't going to: (fill in blank here)?

And by the way, have you stopped beating your wife yet? Yes or No?

Carl
Carl Spackler is offline  
Old 10-17-2008, 07:19 PM
  #50  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Eric Stratton's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,002
Default

Originally Posted by Justdoinmyjob View Post
How do you know NW wasn't going to park them? They had already announced the reduction in the -9s a long time ago.
the number that has been posted about a year ago was in the upper 60's and then when oil shot up it was to be in the upper 50's. at the same time if memory serves delta also announce around an 11% reduction as well. (just making the comparison that the industry started to go south for all when the additional dc9 retirements were announced.)

I've been told by friends at northwest that they did have plans to park 9's but not all. they had plans to keep flying them until around 2013. the flying that was being stopped was being picked up by the initial compass flying. the nwa scope supposedly protects more flying from being outsource by having a ratio in it. (preventing further regional growth at the expense of nwa)
Eric Stratton is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Nevets
Union Talk
42
03-01-2009 08:41 PM
cactiboss
Major
87
10-03-2008 02:24 PM
EWRflyr
Major
44
09-17-2008 09:23 AM
all4114all
Union Talk
23
09-04-2008 10:23 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