Delta TA
 

That moment when you realize the first year FO wage on the EMB 190/195 is higher than all regional carriers capt pay of 10+ years. $121.56 an hour #sighs #chugsmorebeer

The proposed rate is closer to $80. Still not bad when compared to regional captain rates, but it is a bigger airplane. Your $121.56 is for a 12 year FO, not first year. I don't think there will be many 12 year first officers bidding to the 190/195.

Do you have the tables? I was going off what i was seeing on the delta ta thread.

Yeah, they posted the 12 year rates since that is the relevant numbers for the majority of the group. Most of them no longer see longevity increases.

The real table would need 12 rows, comprised of year 1-12 longevity, for each airplane column and then another table for every yearly/DOS increase.

The current first year rate at Delta is $70 for all aircraft. It is not going to $120.

The FO rates at step 12

Attachment 2149

Again, that is if you are on Year 12 longevity. Year 1 is $70 at Delta and $80 with the new TA. However, they are reducing the profit sharing in the TA, so the increase is not really $10 unless Delta makes a lot less profit than projected this year and the next. Part of the $80 is bought be giving back 10% of the profit sharing agreement out the the current 20% they get from $2.5 billion-$6 billion. The TA proposes profit sharing to go to 10% from $2.5 billion-$6 billion instead of the current 20%. Delta is projected to make over $6 billion this year and the next. Pushing $9 billion.

Nice thanks. Still incredible really. The disparity between regionals and majors is insane. Good for delta guys though.

Disparity is incredible, but the Delta pilots aren't really gaining much in this TA when you factor in the profit sharing givebacks and other efficiency givebacks.

The TA actually allows Delta to hire hundreds less, which means hundreds of less jobs for you and me to compete for. Which means longer time at the regionals and less pay over your life. Which might actually turn out as a paycut versus if they say no and keep their current contract and hiring plans.

Sounds like a majority is not for it. And they shouldnt be in this economy. Anything other than a industry leading contract at delta (with the current financial state) of that company is a loss imo. Theyre making money hand over fist.

What about scope? I do not mean number of seats the regionals fly, but the number of airframes per 50 seat, 70 seat, and 76 seat groups. Rumor had it Delta was going to ask for higher limits on regional aircraft than what is currently in C2012. More planes at regionals also slows the moves to take the flying back to mainline and would further delay us folks here at the regionals even though it would mean growth and upgrades for junior regional pilots. Any news on that part of the TA?

There is no scope relief in the new TA.

That's good news. I thought for sure DAL would go for some kind of scope relief on number of shells.

isn't it 2 100 seaters at delta to add 1 more 76 seater at a FFD

This TA gives up more scope. It allows 25 more 70 seat aircraft at the regionals for parking 50 more 50 seat aircraft. Without the new limit Delta would be parking 25 more 50 seat aircraft anyways, possibly more, due to the regionals inability to staff in the coming years.

Delta management is good at convincing DALPA they win with this provision, when in reality Delta was planning on parking at least 25 more 50 seat aircraft anyways.

It actually allows more, larger efficient aircraft at the regional level than allowed today.

The TA also allows more foreign flying than is currently allowed in the Delta contract. This leads to less mainline jobs due to that as well.

Delta is ordering 100 seat aircraft regardless. They can't farm that flying out anyways. The main thing Delta was looking to gain was to be able to keep the most outsourced regional flying it can staff. They just upped that number by 25 in this TA.

Without it, the regionals will probably shrink quicker since it would be better for Delta to have 2 less inefficient 50 seat aircraft and 1 more 100 seat aircraft.

The 25 more 70 seat aircraft will lead to about 10-15 less 100 seat aircraft at mainline.

It appears to be 50 less 50 seaters and 25 more 76 seaters. Well it says 25 more 70 or 76 seaters, but we all know they would all be 76 seaters.

The number crunchers claim 5% fewer planes at DCI and 2% fewer seats. But it would allow 25 more 76 seaters than is allowed currently, which considering they can't staff the 50's they have anyway is a double dip relief to the company that upgouges DCI while helping to solve their staffing crisis.

A decent amount of widebody scope will be given away in the TA.

It further reduces 50 seaters and allows up to 25 more 76 seaters for adding 50 more E190/Cseries type 100 seat aircraft at mainline.

It also further locks a higher mainline/regional block hour ratio and closed in carve out holes.

Widebody scope is hit and miss- some good (tighter defined compliance and a tighter compliance window), some that needs more explaining (how compliance is measured changed).

Albeit, I am not at DAL, they must remember two very important words: scope creep.

It's only 25 more large RJ's...

Not sure where you get this info but the TA is projected to slightly increase manning per block hour. The addition of 50 100 seat aircraft will add additional jobs.

Delta is below the 76 seat number right now by 25 from contract 2012. Dalpa just tied the rest of the deliveries to 100 seat jets. Block hours for jv recaptures the excess capacity, so is a slight scope recapture as well.

The 25 additional 70 seat aircraft will decrease the mainline jobs. The regionals are shrinking because we cannot find pilots willing to work for our compensation levels.

This TA allows 25 additional 70 seat aircraft, which is 50 more 70 seat aircraft.

Only 25 more 50 seat aircraft is better than 50 more 70 seat aircraft.

The DCI carriers will struggle to staff 425 jets in the future. This TA allows a larger portion of that 425 to be 70 seat aircraft.

We understand that, 404- the only reason I'm not up at arms about it is they haven't even exercised all the options they could have for it this round. They tightened up the block hour ratios to further restrict DCI flying along with codifying a few loopholes that existed before.

The staffing problem at the regionals will continue for the time being and probably get worse. It's self mitigating at this point. There are other much more pressing issues with this TA that may require a redo.

Becareful this is guy will beat a dead horse, he does it here and our ALPA forum.

If you understand that the regionals are struggling to staff, then why do you want to allow more larger RJ's?

Leave the current cap and watch the regionals shrink further.

That's what I think, too.

Priorities, though. Negotiations are give and take, not all take... and you gotta look at the whole package.

Those extra jumbo RJs are much lower threat compared to some of the other stuff in there, IMO. It may not even make it past the MEC tomorrow.

You are correct that there are bigger threats in there. Allowing 25 more 70 seat aircraft looks to be a 10-15 aircraft loss on the 100 seat fleet. Not that big, but I think it will lead to less mainline jets than more if you hold the line.

One of the bigger staffing losses looks to be the Check Airman bidding changes and the seniority loss in bidding the first officers will lose. Joint Venture looks like it could reduce the Delta pilot force more too.

You're probably right on the first paragraph, and absolutely agreed on the second paragraph- the second paragraph outlines my major sticking points. JV actually is overall improved, but the shift in the measurement metric is my sticking point and where a lot of hard questions need to be asked and answered.

404,
you seem to be missing the fact that Delta is currently 25 airframes UNDER the allowed cap for 70/76 seaters already. They could go out tomorrow and add those 25 airframes if they so chose to do so. You are off in the weeds on this one. The total cap doesn't change with the new TA.

Here is the summary from the meeting. Again, you are confusing the 25 under the old contract that can be added, to the additional 25 more this TA will allow.

From the meeting:
"Retains the limit of 76 seats at DCI
• DCI fleet shrinks to 425 from 450
• Total number of RJs is reduced by 5.6 percent, RJ seat count reduced by 2 percent
• With current limits of 223 76-seaters and 102 total 70-seaters, allows 25 additional 70 or 76-seat jets, but tied to deliveries of a 100-seat small narrow-body aircraft(1 70/76-seat RJ for every 2 100-seaters delivered to Delta)"

There is a current cap of 223 76-seaters and 102 total 70-seaters, the remaining 125 is 50-seaters for 450 total.

This TA would allow another 25 76/70-seaters for 350 total. Making it a cap of 350 76/70-seaters, the remaining 75 is 50-seaters for 425 total.

What I am getting at is the regionals are shrinking anyways and 425 or less DCI aircraft is the plan anyways. In my opinion this TA allows more of the 425 (or less) DCI planes to be larger 76/70-seaters.

I clarified this in the other thread- it allows 25 more 70 or 76 seaters on top of the current caps, thus 50 more new airframes.

The reduction in the 50's continues as they take deliveries of them to maintain what thankfully is the lowest amount of RJs allowed among the big 3.

So the "retains the limit on 76 seats" is the number of seats, not the number of aircraft, ahhhh.

80 you're wasting your time arguing with this one. He's a master at beating a dead horse. Check out the Compass Updates thread and you'll see what I'm talking about. He's a broken record playing over and over and over....and over.

This above is correct. Pay attention. Quiz later on when you want to know where your mainline job went.

I'm a little concerned at how much longhaul flying is being outsourced to Virgin Atlantic. It's not our battle to fight (yet) but most of us will be at these airlines one day and I hope the international widebody flying is still there for us... It's also kind of ridiculous profit sharing was reduced.

Why does Delta keep reaffirming the RJ commitments, only to spend millions years later, trying to get out of them. Also, management is totally confident the mainline pilots will bail them out of these deals every time. That's pretty arrogant.