Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > United
Sure, Lets Outsource Some More Large "RJs" >

Sure, Lets Outsource Some More Large "RJs"

Search

Notices

Sure, Lets Outsource Some More Large "RJs"

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-22-2012 | 06:25 PM
  #81  
80ktsClamp's Avatar
Da Hudge
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
Default

Originally Posted by 76drvr
And exactly when was that? The company wanted to add seats, that should really come as no surprise to you.
At the very beginning of the process. It took about a week and a half for the story to change. They were adamant that the company had not requested more seats for the RJs.

Just telling it like I heard it from the horse's mouth.
Reply
Old 11-22-2012 | 06:58 PM
  #82  
Moderator
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
Default

Originally Posted by untied
You need to go check out the manufacturers web site bud.

Advertised as a 90 seater.

If it makes you feel better to call it a 76 seater....go ahead and keep kidding yourself.

Did you hear about Bombardier's new slogan??

"The CRJ-900....Making outsourcing profitable again!"
Ah, yet they've stayed 76 seaters for 3 contracts now. And we have received much more then 3% raises. And we've reduced outsourced jobs. Amazing.
Reply
Old 11-22-2012 | 07:13 PM
  #83  
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,629
Likes: 0
From: 756 Left Side
Default

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
DL small jet ratios are domestic block hour ratios.

AF code share is Passenger Seat Kilometers.
Domestic Block Hours.. ok, thanks. But now that opens up a new question-
So, a 767 or 747 does "Domestic".. that counts, correct?

I wonder how we find out how many "Domestic" Block hours Mainline Delta flew last year and this year, and the same for UCAL.

Motch
Reply
Old 11-22-2012 | 07:17 PM
  #84  
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,629
Likes: 0
From: 756 Left Side
Default

Originally Posted by jsled
You are correct. But current book allows unlimited 70 seaters, which are also configured with a First Class, AND about 22% growth in block hours.
Which is it.. unlimited 70 seaters (configured to 66 seats?) or 22% Growth (in what?- if it's YOUR [UAL] Block hours, I was told the number is at 110-118%)
You can't have 500 70 Seaters if they don't have "block hours" to fly.

Either way.. you think the new Scope is better.. I think it's Worse. We are not going to change either one of our views.

Motch
Reply
Old 11-22-2012 | 07:49 PM
  #85  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,750
Likes: 0
From: 737 CA
Default

Originally Posted by horrido27
Which is it.. unlimited 70 seaters (configured to 66 seats?) or 22% Growth (in what?- if it's YOUR [UAL] Block hours, I was told the number is at 110-118%)
You can't have 500 70 Seaters if they don't have "block hours" to fly.

Either way.. you think the new Scope is better.. I think it's Worse. We are not going to change either one of our views.

Motch
I can't change your mind if you don't understand the current proposal.

Current book is 70 seaters (configured with 66 seats including F/C and economy plus) up to 100% of Mainline block hours. (guess what...Mainline block hours = UAL + CAL now, Motch). If you read the Scope FAQ you will find that UAX is at 78% of mainline block hours today. So they can potentially grow by 22% under the current contract. Albeit, without 76 seaters as they are not allowed.

THis TA restricts UAX to 120% of narrow-body block hours. If you read the Scope FAQ you will find that UAX is currently at 112% of narrow-body block hours. So they could potentially grow by 8%.

Current book = potential 22% growth in UAX block hours but no 76 seaters
TA = potential 8% growth in UAX block hours with 76 seaters

SLed

Last edited by jsled; 11-22-2012 at 08:00 PM.
Reply
Old 11-22-2012 | 08:13 PM
  #86  
Monkeyfly's Avatar
Widebody
10M Airline Miles
15 Years
50 Countries Visited
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 777
Likes: 0
From: 777 CAP
Default

This whole argument can be solved by asking ourselves one question.

Was Jeff or when he saw the Delta Scope?
Reply
Old 11-22-2012 | 10:12 PM
  #87  
DrivinTheDash's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
From: B-757/767 FO
Default

Originally Posted by jsled
I can't change your mind if you don't understand the current proposal.

Current book is 70 seaters (configured with 66 seats including F/C and economy plus) up to 100% of Mainline block hours. (guess what...Mainline block hours = UAL + CAL now, Motch). If you read the Scope FAQ you will find that UAX is at 78% of mainline block hours today. So they can potentially grow by 22% under the current contract. Albeit, without 76 seaters as they are not allowed.

THis TA restricts UAX to 120% of narrow-body block hours. If you read the Scope FAQ you will find that UAX is currently at 112% of narrow-body block hours. So they could potentially grow by 8%.

Current book = potential 22% growth in UAX block hours but no 76 seaters
TA = potential 8% growth in UAX block hours with 76 seaters

SLed
I don't necessarily agree that this is an improvement in scope, but the math as to how much UAX block hours could grow in each scenario is not quite right in any event.

Current book allows growth of 22 percentage points, which is actually 28% growth from the current size; that is, 100 is 128% of 78. The TA allows growth of 8 percentage points, but that's actually only 7% growth (120 is 107% of 112).

IOW, the percentage increase in allowable UAX blockhours is actually even more curtailed by the TA than stated.
Reply
Old 11-23-2012 | 01:32 AM
  #88  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,750
Likes: 0
From: 737 CA
Default

Originally Posted by DrivinTheDash
I don't necessarily agree that this is an improvement in scope, but the math as to how much UAX block hours could grow in each scenario is not quite right in any event.

Current book allows growth of 22 percentage points, which is actually 28% growth from the current size; that is, 100 is 128% of 78. The TA allows growth of 8 percentage points, but that's actually only 7% growth (120 is 107% of 112).

IOW, the percentage increase in allowable UAX blockhours is actually even more curtailed by the TA than stated.
Thanks Dash man. I should have said percentage points not percent. The point still stands...this TA curtails UAX growth.


Sled
Reply
Old 11-23-2012 | 03:22 PM
  #89  
Banned
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 474
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by horrido27
Domestic Block Hours.. ok, thanks. But now that opens up a new question-
So, a 767 or 747 does "Domestic".. that counts, correct?

I wonder how we find out how many "Domestic" Block hours Mainline Delta flew last year and this year, and the same for UCAL.

Motch
A couple of quick corrections from 80s original post may help add some clarity. From the DAL contract:

"The Company will maintain a minimum ratio of revenue block hours of Company flying on all narrowbody aircraft and all B-767-300 (non – ER) aircraft (MBH) to revenue block hours of flying in category A and C operations (DBH) under the following chart:"


Category A and C refer to Delta regional partners.



So a 747, 330, or 767ER would not count, but a non- ER 767 would, since it is a domestic aircraft.


As of DOS, the mainline flew 54% of the domestic block hours covered by this ratio, when all is complete the minimum will be 61%, but a more realistic number based on the business plan is 64%.


Also, on the international joint venture with AF/KLM/AZ, the production balance is measured by Equivalent Available Seat Kilometers (EASKs), not passenger seat kilometers. EASKs also consider the cargo capacity of the various aircraft. EASKs is defined as;


“EASK” means equivalent available seat kilometers, a measurement of capacity adjusted for an aircraft’s seat density and cargo capacity, as defined and calculated in the AF/KL/AZ JV agreement.

By utilizing EASKs, as opposed to block hours or frequencies, Delta pilots fly over 60% of the JV pilot block hours, while only flying approximately 50% of the EASKs.
Reply
Old 11-23-2012 | 03:27 PM
  #90  
Banned
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 474
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
At the very beginning of the process.
In March? During negotiations? Not sure which "process" you are referring to.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Planespotta
Hangar Talk
7
09-21-2007 07:05 PM
AAflyer
Major
24
06-04-2007 05:47 PM
Paddles
Cargo
82
12-11-2006 05:03 AM
SWAjet
Hangar Talk
5
08-20-2006 09:55 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



Your Privacy Choices