Originally Posted by Rolf
(Post 1101580)
I'm not sure which route is better. It seems to me that 1 scale to fly everything from 717s to -800 encourages the SWA to buy larger (fewer?) aircraft. Section 6 wishlist: improving near international codeshare, singing lessons (trust me, TS) and a shrubbery!
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1101590)
So you think the -MAX rates will essentially be an extension of the -500 rates? This is very interesting. Guys at DAL are all abuzz because they think that an airframe that is more efficient should pay more than a current model. i.e.. The 787 is really nothing more than a 767 on steroids.
|
Originally Posted by Smokey23
Negotiations will be tough....they're ALWAYS tough with this mgmt. We're already leading the industry with our current contract, so big gains were pretty unlikely from the git-go (unless of course those Delta boys can "take it back" but that's sounding less and less likely if the chatter on L&G is to be believed)....
My philosophy still remains the same: just because some other company (airline in this case) can't manage the business properly and files for bankruptcy doesn't mean the rest of that industry (other PROFITABLE airlines in this case) can't get pay raises. UCAL Mgmt: "Well, you know AMR filed for Chapter 11." Union: "What's your point?" UCAL Mgmt: "The point is their high costs made them lose money." Union: "So? Our low costs lead us to a $1.5 billion profit this year." UCAL Mgmt: "Hey, you know we could order some new planes!" Union: "Great! While your at it, FUPM!" |
Originally Posted by shoelu
(Post 1101611)
Well, perhaps you do it very differently at Delta, but at SWA we do it by aircraft type. We have rates for specific different types of aircraft. As I understand it the 767 and the 787 are completely different aircraft and are type certificated as such. If Boeing type certificates the MAX as a different aircraft our CBA states that a re-opener will be required since we only have rates of pay for the airframes I listed previously. The -500 rates are the same as the -800 rates, so yes I think the MAX rates will be an extension of the -500, but I would guess you already knew that and are trying to make it sound sensational.
I really didn't finish my thought about the 787 vis-a-vis the 767. What I meant to say is that it essentially seats the same number of people, but has greatly increased range. However, it still has 2 throttles, 2 pilots yada yada yada... |
Originally Posted by EWRflyr
(Post 1101613)
Hey, don't forget us United-Continental pilots who are in tough negotiations trying to "take it back" as well. We are all counting on each other.
My philosophy still remains the same: just because some other company (airline in this case) can't manage the business properly and files for bankruptcy doesn't mean the rest of that industry (other PROFITABLE airlines in this case) can't get pay raises. UCAL Mgmt: "Well, you know AMR filed for Chapter 11." Union: "What's your point?" UCAL Mgmt: "The point is their high costs made them lose money." Union: "So? Our low costs lead us to a $1.5 billion profit this year." UCAL Mgmt: "Hey, you know we could order some new planes!" Union: "Great! While your at it, FUPM!" |
It will still be a 737-700 or -800 flying the same stage length so asking 10-15% more would be totally idiotic - an across the board COLA raise for all would be a better target in the Section 6. Swa has said nothing about buying -900s.
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1101620)
No.. no sensationalism.. just trying to understand if you can raise the bar, and if not.. why. That's all. When an industry is looking at the "leader" we expect to be led. Spin it how you want.
I really didn't finish my thought about the 787 vis-a-vis the 767. What I meant to say is that it essentially seats the same number of people, but has greatly increased range. However, it still has 2 throttles, 2 pilots yada yada yada... |
Originally Posted by shoelu
(Post 1101631)
Perhaps you can get in touch with Boeing and ask them how they will type certificate the MAX, then share it with the rest of us then we will all know if we will be negotiating a new rate for the MAX. Which part of this do you not understand? Is it the part that we have pay rates for different types of aircraft, or that we don't yet know how the MAX will be type certificated? It all seems relatively simple to understand. Does Delta not have similar language in their CBA? Doed it not state that re-openers are only required for an aircraft not currently in the contract?
And as far as having to reopen for new aircraft.. that was given away a few years ago. Long stupid story that I am sure interests you not. |
Originally Posted by V169
(Post 1101627)
It will still be a 737-700 or -800 flying the same stage length so asking 10-15% more would be totally idiotic - an across the board COLA raise for all would be a better target in the Section 6.
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1101636)
You do not have different "types" You have different "variants". Look at your license. 717 excepted.
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:13 PM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands