Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
- Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
- Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
- Share the passion for aviation
- Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun
APA Proposal Posted
- Thread starter Johnlp3
- Start date
- Watchers 12
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
- Invite your friends
- Share the passion of aviation
- Friendliest aviation community on the web
General Lee said:Surplus1,
If Delta and Dalpa come up with plans to furlough more (which they probably will....), you should plan on Dalpa making deals to get the furloughs in CRJ70's (not necessarily the ones you already have...)---but new ones. I really can see this happening now, and I know the VP of Flt Ops---Joe kolshack---said it would be possible with the right rates---which I am sure Dalpa would accept now----because dues are dues---and they want the $$$$ over there at ALPA National. It just makes sense, unfortunately.
Bye Bye---General Lee
General Lee,
1. DMEC (there is no Dalpa) has been attempting to "make deals" that would transfer or prevent us from operating our CL65-700s since the aircraft originally came to be. You have never given up and I don't expect that you will. It has nothing to do with furloughs. You were doing it long before there were any furloughs and long before 9/11. Attempts do cloak your predatory behavior towards us behind a mask of furlough concerns won't sell on this property.
The massive furloughs are of as much concern to us as they are to you and our sympathies are not confined to the Delta system. We regret ALL furloughs wherever they may be. However, your attempts to capitalize on this unfortunate circumstance and use it to obscure your long standing intent to remove or curtail our flying, does not fool anyone that I know in my group.
2. IF you are able to negotiate the placement of the -700 on the DAL certificate, I, personally, would have no objection provided it does not result in the transfer of any of our equipment to your certificate. New aircraft, on your certificate, is your right to negotiate. I accept that. I hope you accept that we have the same right but I don't believe that you do.
3. The "right rates" (your terms) is a key phrase in how you negotiate. You can match our basic book rates if you choose to do so. That will NOT match our costs. To match the cost, you would have to give up your A Plan, your medical differences and some of your work rules. That would require a supplemental agreement of some type, i.e., a new contract (within a contract) or a new subsidiary. Basically, there are only two (2) ways you can "outbid" us for the RJ flying -- a) offer to fly the same type of equipment for much lower rates or b) gut your current contract and fly them for the same rate. The cost of creating a new subsidiary would not allow you to "match" our costs, unless you agree to fly (our equipment types) for less overall.
4. Your MEC made a conscious choice to declare "war" on us, the day that you decided to impose limits on our CL65-700 and restrict our CL65-100/200 flying. They were made aware that we would see it that way before the fact and they decided to do it regardless. We are fighting that war now, we were fighting it before 9/11, and we will continue to fight it until one of us wins. You should understand that is the way it is. Whether you agree or disagree is just as irrelevant to us as our thinking is irrelevant to you.
You can end the war anytime you choose. In my opinion, that will require nothing less than a return to your 1996 Scope clause. When you have done that, we will be able to work with you to the extent that you wish to do so. If you do not wish to work together, that will be fine too. In other words, what you do or don't do with your contract is of no importance to us as long as it does not affect us in a negative way. We belong to a mutual admiration society. Apparently you see us as interlopers and we see you as predators. It doesn't matter who is "right", perception is reality for most people.
Your MEC has formally declared that our airline is separate from your airline. The ALPA has supported completely that unilateral declaration. We have accepted your "separate" decision, but apparently you haven't accepted it yourselves. You wish us to be "separate" when it is convenient for you but not separate when you find togetherness more palatable. You may want it both ways, but we don't. In that we are a completely separate airline, you have nothing to say about what we do and we have nothing to say about what you do. That is the way that YOU wanted it. You got what you wanted, now live with it.
5. Since we are a separate airline, if your MEC decides to underbid for our flying in an attempt to get all or any part of it for yourselves, you can expect us to defend our flying by responding in kind. I'll try to make that clearer so there is no doubt in your mind. IF you bid for our flying by undercutting our contract, we will bid for your flying by doing exactly the same thing. I hope you understand the ramifications. Perhaps it "makes sense" to you, but it does not make sense to me.
To paraphrase the current circumstances, we both have weapons of mutual destruction. We will not be the first to use them. However, if you decide to use your WMD, we will respond by using our WMD. The result will be chaos. We both have much to lose and I think that would be a very unwise decision on your part. You have a much better chance of winning the current dispute if you do NOT do that. By now you should be fully aware that we do not respond to threats by attempting to appease you. Be careful what you ask for, you might get it.
On a personal level, I wish you only the best.
Note: The opinions expressed herein are my own.
eaglefly said:
That is technically correct. However, they cannot be "cost competitive" by flying the RJs for "equal" book rates. So unless that item is just playing a game to get the votes of junior AA pilots, the coming low bid is self-evident. The APA proposal retains the pension plans. Your contract does not contain any retirement provisos (a 401K isn't retirement). Unless the APA gives up the pension for RJ pilots, they can't match your costs (with mainline RJs) unless they fly for substantially lower book rates. In addition, there are other much higher costs in the AA infrastructure. They have to undercut your book rates to be "cost competitive".
Given the foregoing, that section of the TA will never come to pass unless they do underbid you overall. Since the underbid will affect only pilots that are currently or about to become unemployed, I predict they will do it to the extent necessary to take as much of your flying as they can. They have nothing to lose.
I agree that your contract cannot be modified without your agreement. However, the same was true of the AA contract. Don't let it escape you that there has been a "tentative agreement". If AA didn't have the leverage to prevent that, what makes you believe that Eagle has the leverage to prevent a change to your contract? I argue that you have much less leverage than they do. At least the APA supports the AA pilots and looks after their interests. Does your union support the interests of Eagle pilots? If your answer is yes, I sure wish you'd take the time to tell me in what way.
There are 3 components in the TA (as posted) that relate to RJs. Let's look at them one at a time.
a. "Agreement to allow furloughees into CRJ-700s and excess RJ50s."
What exactly does that mean? What is the definition of an "excess RJ50"? On what basis will the furloughees be allowed to go into these excess RJ50s? Why are furloughees allowed to go into CRJ-700s if (see "b." below) the -700s are already going to AA? Apparently ther's a lot more to this TA than what we see in the released summary. The devil is in the details.
b. "51+ seater to AA, if cost competitive."
This says that the 70-seaters go to AA regardless of what it says in "a." above. Is that a contracdiction? Why the double reference? I wrote to the "cost competitive" clause above. Since the TA retains the A and B plans, they can't be "competitive" if they fly for equal (your word) book rates. Who will decide if it's cost competitive or not? Will it be AMR only or will it be AMR/APA jointly? This "summary" doesn't really summarize very much. It could mean that they don't get them at all or just about anything else that you want to believe (at AA or AE). Again, the devil is in the details and we don't know what those details are. I hope the AA pilots will be able to see more than this "TA summary" before they vote. By the time we get to actual contractual language you may not be able to recognize these bullet points.
c. "Loosen RJ50 wraps."
Just what does that mean? Does it mean no more ASM caps? Does it mean "reverse code share" is now OK? Does it mean unlimited RJ50s with no restrictions at all? Are there any hidden ratios, etc.? Does it mean that more "AE flying" will shift to TSA and CHQ and the furloughed AA guys will go there instead of Eagle? Who really knows what it means? Certainly not anyone that reads only the TA summary. Again, the devil is in the details.
Basically what you have here is the APA using the careers, working conditions, pay and future of the Eagle pilots as a bargaining chip. The AA pilots attempting to steal ALL of the CRJ700 flying currently at Eagle and the associated jobs of the Eagle pilots. The AA pilots attempting to insert their furloughed pilots into the Eagle seniority list, under unknown terms, without the consent of the Eagle pilots. The AA pilots possibly filling all future vacancies at Eagle, with furloughed AA pilots (which would abrogate the seniority of every Eagle pilot and could bring all future promotions at Eagle to a screeching halt). Standard procedure of mainline pilots exploiting and dictating the future of regional pilots. Seems there is little distinction between the APA and ALPA.
This is predatory behavior in the extreme and manifests the APA's total disregard of the Eagle pilots. What's new? Reality is that has been the position of the APA for a very long time. All the other garbage about unity and one list was nothing more than a ruse to sucker you in. Unfortunately, many of you fell for it which merely served to enhance their ability to do it. It is an understatemt to say, as you did, that they stabbed you in the back. Actually they stabbed you in the front quite some time ago, now they're just twisting the knife.
Our contract CANNOT be unilaterally modified by the APA nor AMR (outside of BK). There are NO provisions for some of the things they want to do. In fact there is language prohibiting it. So they either spend considerable time and money starting a new carrier or negotiate with us.
Our CURRENT aircraft AND ROUTES cannot be transferred except in accordance with our CBA.
The details are not in, but AMR has got to know that mixing our pilots under these circumstances would be like mixing the Isrealis and the palestinians. [/QUOTE]
Before I say anything else, let me make it clear that my sympathies are totally on the side of the Eagle pilots in this matter. I support anything you can do to prevent it and I'm on your side all the way.
Having said that, let's be realistic. I respectfully submit that while your analogy of the Israeli/Palestinian scenario may be accurate, AMR obviously couldn't care less. If they did they would not have negotiated such and agreement with the APA while excluding you from the process.
If this TA is ratified at AA the contract terms, whatever they are, will be in place before negotiations even begin with Eagle. Since your CBA is not now amendable, technically you don't have to negotiate until 2005 (correct me if that's the wrong date). At that time they can put the terms on the table as one of their 5 (or is it 4), if you can't agree, it will just go to arbitration. What outcome would you expect?
Side note: ALPA is allegedly opposed to baseball style arbitration, they say. What is the real difference between that and the process that ALPA put in place in the 16-year Eagle contract? Aren't you limited to the issues you can seek to change? Don't you have to arbitrate your differences every 4 years? Could it be that "white man speaks with forked tongue"?
Eagle is incorporated separately from AA. It is quite possible (I'm not 100% certain of the exact corporate structure) that Eagle could be declared bankrupt, without declaring AA to be bankrupt. Should that happen, your CBA is likely to vanish. Getting a bankruptcy court to uphold your interests is not a pleasant proposition.
Your "union" (ALPA) will provide you with all the lip service that it wants to in an effort to make you believe that it is "doing its best" in your behalf. That's somewhat ironic in that it is no secret that ALPA supports what the APA is doing to you and is itself doing the very same thing between ALPA carriers. Do you really think they will go to war with AMR or the APA on your behalf? Don't hold your breath my friend.
You can't sue the APA because the APA is not your union and has no obligation to represent your interests, fairly or otherwise. Will your pilots support litigation, that could last for years, against AMR or ALPA? Given that you did not (as a group) support the '97 litigation against ALPA (when you got your 16-year contract) and therefore lost the suit, I doubt seriously that you would support something far more difficiult.
This is a classic case of being between the rock and the hard place. While I understand and support your feelings, this is not a pretty picture.
I wish all Eagle pilots the very best and hope that somehow you can pull a rabbit out of the hat and survive this mess. Maybe the AA pilots will vote this down but frankly I doubt they will. The senior pilots will not give up their pensions by doing that. If AA files Chapter 11, there's a very good chance they will lose those pensions or have them substantially reduced (like U and UAL). For that reason, I think the TA will pass. They will sacrifice the junior pilots and cut their losses. In the overall, they are not even going to consider what happens to you guys.
Sorry to be so cynical and for your sake I hope I'm full of it. Again, I wish you and all the Eagle pilots the very best.
You make some valid points.
A few comments :
You are correct in that even I had been willing to "toe the line" one last time in an effort to mend fences and bring our groups together.
My trust was again violated.
Examples of why I'll never trust the APA nor AA pilots in general can be read in another thread by replies from characters such as "draginass" and some former 717 idiot.
They've kept quiet, but the true colors are now permanently out.
You are also correct that the "devil is in the details". Our MEC will recieve a briefing today by the President of Eagle and then meet with the APA and AMR negotiators within the next day or two. Then we will see what AMR (and the APA) WANT these things to mean.
It will be interesting to see if these involve "negotiations" or are a ramjob "take it or you'll pay deal".
We shall see.
What do you propose we do about our union ? Our MEC are all mid seniority level guys who will be among the first to be screwed and seem very concientious (sp?). They are reacting VERY calmly until ALL the facts are in (unlike our pilot group, most of whom are more enraged then anything I've seen in 16 years - myself included). There are some indications that any flowback rights will be in accordance with Suppliment W/Letter 3. No one is thrilled with that, but if done in accordance with previous practice, than complaints would be minimal as it is a MUTUALLY AGREED process.
Again, it cannot be underemphasized that if the APA had their way they would sacrifice every Eagle pilot, regardless of their contract and most of their junior pilots would applaud it (as those mentioned characters prove), as anything that saves their asses is justified. So, even if Suppliment W/Letter 3 is honored, the damage is the REAL feelings and beliefs of the APA and too many AA pilots.
Interestingly, AMR wanted total elimination of Suppliment W but just to immediately avoid BK, conceded some issues that will take time. They also have informed us that they DO NOT want to ask us for concessions because to do so would cost more money than the few items they could wring out of our contract. Additionally, they do not want to jeopardize two things that guarantee stability to any business that own the contract, its flying and the pilots listed in it.
1.) The length (another 12 years including negotiating time).
2.) The IAI (which guarantees "middle of the road" pay scales).
If AMR were to open our contract to modifications (only in BK), they cannot assure themselves that they would do more harm than good.
Most anylists believe that ultimately AMR will need more concessions and PENSION RELIEF to be competetive and most of us here would NOW love to see a BK and the 1113 filing to stiff characters such as those mentioned above out of more pay and pension benefits.
Their comments have proven they would actually enjoy taking every last one of our aircraft and leave us by the curb, so most of us now will NEVER place any concern or trust there.
That is now reality and a byproduct of A LONG HISTORY of similar behavior by their union and the REAL feelings of A LOT of their pilots. Although I believe we have a special place of disdain in their hearts, look at the treatment of the TWA and Reno pilots.
If the APA is willing to inappropriately and illegally participate in strong-arming our contractual rights, what message does that send to its pilots ?
The message it sends is that it is an acceptable and ethical practice and the end justifies the means. Many of their pilots gleefully seize that view and willingly hop on the RAM EAGLE trainride.
Ironically, one of the previously mentioned characters must have been a TWA screwee (717 ?) and most certainly complained high and hard about the being on the receiving end of the same practice he now has gleefully accepted on the giving end.
Again, even if these feelings are not true of a majority there the PERCEPTION created by those previously mentioned characters with the assistance of the APA that proves that "perception IS reality".
One thing is for sure. The mixing of the pilot groups in the same cockpit now (under these circumstances) would be poor decision.
Eagle anger and distrust is even worse now, than when the PDP (who incidentally has again resprouted out of the ground like a diseased mushroom) hired that crooked defender of murderers to publicly claim we were incapable of safely operating Jet aircraft (to which the APA did not publicly disagree).
We can no longer disregard this type of treatment.
There must be accountability.
Stay tuned.
A few comments :
You are correct in that even I had been willing to "toe the line" one last time in an effort to mend fences and bring our groups together.
My trust was again violated.
Examples of why I'll never trust the APA nor AA pilots in general can be read in another thread by replies from characters such as "draginass" and some former 717 idiot.
They've kept quiet, but the true colors are now permanently out.
You are also correct that the "devil is in the details". Our MEC will recieve a briefing today by the President of Eagle and then meet with the APA and AMR negotiators within the next day or two. Then we will see what AMR (and the APA) WANT these things to mean.
It will be interesting to see if these involve "negotiations" or are a ramjob "take it or you'll pay deal".
We shall see.
What do you propose we do about our union ? Our MEC are all mid seniority level guys who will be among the first to be screwed and seem very concientious (sp?). They are reacting VERY calmly until ALL the facts are in (unlike our pilot group, most of whom are more enraged then anything I've seen in 16 years - myself included). There are some indications that any flowback rights will be in accordance with Suppliment W/Letter 3. No one is thrilled with that, but if done in accordance with previous practice, than complaints would be minimal as it is a MUTUALLY AGREED process.
Again, it cannot be underemphasized that if the APA had their way they would sacrifice every Eagle pilot, regardless of their contract and most of their junior pilots would applaud it (as those mentioned characters prove), as anything that saves their asses is justified. So, even if Suppliment W/Letter 3 is honored, the damage is the REAL feelings and beliefs of the APA and too many AA pilots.
Interestingly, AMR wanted total elimination of Suppliment W but just to immediately avoid BK, conceded some issues that will take time. They also have informed us that they DO NOT want to ask us for concessions because to do so would cost more money than the few items they could wring out of our contract. Additionally, they do not want to jeopardize two things that guarantee stability to any business that own the contract, its flying and the pilots listed in it.
1.) The length (another 12 years including negotiating time).
2.) The IAI (which guarantees "middle of the road" pay scales).
If AMR were to open our contract to modifications (only in BK), they cannot assure themselves that they would do more harm than good.
Most anylists believe that ultimately AMR will need more concessions and PENSION RELIEF to be competetive and most of us here would NOW love to see a BK and the 1113 filing to stiff characters such as those mentioned above out of more pay and pension benefits.
Their comments have proven they would actually enjoy taking every last one of our aircraft and leave us by the curb, so most of us now will NEVER place any concern or trust there.
That is now reality and a byproduct of A LONG HISTORY of similar behavior by their union and the REAL feelings of A LOT of their pilots. Although I believe we have a special place of disdain in their hearts, look at the treatment of the TWA and Reno pilots.
If the APA is willing to inappropriately and illegally participate in strong-arming our contractual rights, what message does that send to its pilots ?
The message it sends is that it is an acceptable and ethical practice and the end justifies the means. Many of their pilots gleefully seize that view and willingly hop on the RAM EAGLE trainride.
Ironically, one of the previously mentioned characters must have been a TWA screwee (717 ?) and most certainly complained high and hard about the being on the receiving end of the same practice he now has gleefully accepted on the giving end.
Again, even if these feelings are not true of a majority there the PERCEPTION created by those previously mentioned characters with the assistance of the APA that proves that "perception IS reality".
One thing is for sure. The mixing of the pilot groups in the same cockpit now (under these circumstances) would be poor decision.
Eagle anger and distrust is even worse now, than when the PDP (who incidentally has again resprouted out of the ground like a diseased mushroom) hired that crooked defender of murderers to publicly claim we were incapable of safely operating Jet aircraft (to which the APA did not publicly disagree).
We can no longer disregard this type of treatment.
There must be accountability.
Stay tuned.
Last edited:
General Lee
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2002
- Posts
- 20,442
Surplus1 and Eaglefly,
I can see your anger and understand your plight. I have also seen the same thing in my friends eyes as they were furloughed from "the last job they would ever have." This is a business, and the airlines will obviously do whatever they want. Growth for the Eagle pilots will obviously stop for awhile---and the DCI pilots probably fear the same will happen to them. Well, the Delta VP of Flt OPS said in LA yesterday that they were open to Delta Furloughs flying the CRJ70's---for the same rates. I believe Dalpa would go for that---and that was something Delta management wants---more RJ's--especially 70 or 90 seaters. This is business---to Delta or American. I forsee all new 70 seaters and planes up to 100 seats (the VP said that) going to furloughs. And why not? Do you want them out on the street while you continue to flourish? I hope not. Is this impeding your growth? You guys at DCI have grown a lot in 2 years. I do not think the same has happened at Eagle, though.
Bye Bye---General Lee
I can see your anger and understand your plight. I have also seen the same thing in my friends eyes as they were furloughed from "the last job they would ever have." This is a business, and the airlines will obviously do whatever they want. Growth for the Eagle pilots will obviously stop for awhile---and the DCI pilots probably fear the same will happen to them. Well, the Delta VP of Flt OPS said in LA yesterday that they were open to Delta Furloughs flying the CRJ70's---for the same rates. I believe Dalpa would go for that---and that was something Delta management wants---more RJ's--especially 70 or 90 seaters. This is business---to Delta or American. I forsee all new 70 seaters and planes up to 100 seats (the VP said that) going to furloughs. And why not? Do you want them out on the street while you continue to flourish? I hope not. Is this impeding your growth? You guys at DCI have grown a lot in 2 years. I do not think the same has happened at Eagle, though.
Bye Bye---General Lee
Last edited:
pure fantasy
no way AA or Delta could offer competitive rates on RJs. There's much more to it than hourly rate. work rules, medical, pension would all go away if you truly were competitive. Top 50% will sell you guys out and then throw some line in about getting RJs if competitive, its just a line to make the zhit taste better.
mainline isn't even competitive with Song. "Last Job"
ya last flying job.
Analysts say Song's costs will be higher than those at low-fare rivals because its pilots fall under Atlanta-based Delta's labor contracts and will be more expensive. Southwest (NYSE:LUV - News) and JetBlue (NasdaqNM:JBLU - News) have been profitable, as has AirTran Holdings Inc. (NYSE:AAI - News), another Song competitor.
"We will be price competitive," said Song spokeswoman Stacy Geagan. "Customer trust of major airlines right now is very much in jeopardy, and for Song it's very important for us to reestablish that bond with the customer."
To test Song's price competitiveness, Reuters spot-checked Song's, JetBlue's and AirTran's Web sites for nonstop round trips between New York and Orlando and between Boston and Tampa, leaving on Tuesday, June 3 and returning two days later, with both flights as near to 10 a.m. as possible.
Song offered a $255 fare for the New York-to-Orlando route, excluding taxes, while JetBlue charged $138 and AirTran $162, though the latter required a connection in Atlanta. For travelers with flexible departure times, Song offered a $155 fare, JetBlue a $128 fare, and AirTran the same $162 fare.
For the Boston-to-Tampa route, Song offers a $236.50 fare, with a return flight departure at 6:10 a.m., while AirTran charges $194, but also with an Atlanta connection. JetBlue does not fly to or from Boston.
HOT COMPETITION
Tom Parsons, chief executive at BestFares.com in Dallas, said Song is targeting hotly competitive territory.
"I can understand Delta's move because it has to be competitive, and it is picking up prime markets," he said. "Because of all the low-cost airlines flying on the East Coast, (Song) is going to have to fill up 90 to 95 percent of those planes just to break even. It will be difficult."
Delta filled 68.6 percent of its seats in February.
Song will fly Boeing 757s, each with 199 coach seats. It will start on April 15 with one jet.
Trippler and Parsons said Song will over time need effectively to compete on price.
"Their mission, their planes, their aircraft are definitely designed to beat up JetBlue," said Parsons. "The question is, how cheap can fares go, and will Delta be willing to go that low? I believe it will."
no way AA or Delta could offer competitive rates on RJs. There's much more to it than hourly rate. work rules, medical, pension would all go away if you truly were competitive. Top 50% will sell you guys out and then throw some line in about getting RJs if competitive, its just a line to make the zhit taste better.
mainline isn't even competitive with Song. "Last Job"
ya last flying job.
Analysts say Song's costs will be higher than those at low-fare rivals because its pilots fall under Atlanta-based Delta's labor contracts and will be more expensive. Southwest (NYSE:LUV - News) and JetBlue (NasdaqNM:JBLU - News) have been profitable, as has AirTran Holdings Inc. (NYSE:AAI - News), another Song competitor.
"We will be price competitive," said Song spokeswoman Stacy Geagan. "Customer trust of major airlines right now is very much in jeopardy, and for Song it's very important for us to reestablish that bond with the customer."
To test Song's price competitiveness, Reuters spot-checked Song's, JetBlue's and AirTran's Web sites for nonstop round trips between New York and Orlando and between Boston and Tampa, leaving on Tuesday, June 3 and returning two days later, with both flights as near to 10 a.m. as possible.
Song offered a $255 fare for the New York-to-Orlando route, excluding taxes, while JetBlue charged $138 and AirTran $162, though the latter required a connection in Atlanta. For travelers with flexible departure times, Song offered a $155 fare, JetBlue a $128 fare, and AirTran the same $162 fare.
For the Boston-to-Tampa route, Song offers a $236.50 fare, with a return flight departure at 6:10 a.m., while AirTran charges $194, but also with an Atlanta connection. JetBlue does not fly to or from Boston.
HOT COMPETITION
Tom Parsons, chief executive at BestFares.com in Dallas, said Song is targeting hotly competitive territory.
"I can understand Delta's move because it has to be competitive, and it is picking up prime markets," he said. "Because of all the low-cost airlines flying on the East Coast, (Song) is going to have to fill up 90 to 95 percent of those planes just to break even. It will be difficult."
Delta filled 68.6 percent of its seats in February.
Song will fly Boeing 757s, each with 199 coach seats. It will start on April 15 with one jet.
Trippler and Parsons said Song will over time need effectively to compete on price.
"Their mission, their planes, their aircraft are definitely designed to beat up JetBlue," said Parsons. "The question is, how cheap can fares go, and will Delta be willing to go that low? I believe it will."
General Lee
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2002
- Posts
- 20,442
Flaps30,
I don't know if you are privy to all of the negotiations right now between the pilots at Delta and management, but Delta will become leaner and meaner. Not only will the pilots give back something, but the other employee groups---including DCI---will be asked (the DL flt Attendants and Mechanics will be told) to give up some pay and benefits. I don't think the analysts have seen this yet, but we will probably have fares very close to Jetblue's, and then we will also have a better frequent flyer program (thanks to our recently approved codeshare with CO and NW). Our planes at Song will eventually (Oct) have better entertainment than jetblue, and we will actually have a marketing dept. that will have commercials etc to get the word out---something we don't really do right now. The costs will all be lower, and we will fly airplanes longer and more often to bring down the costs. Just watch.
As far as the new RJ's out there, you can bet that Dalpa will negotiate for 70 seaters and 90 seaters for furloughs at Comair's rates----and our VP of Flt Ops said they would like that. If Dalpa includes any extra furloughs in the concessions---you can bet that they would get 70 and 90 seaters for them to fly. I don't know if left seat on any new 50 seaters would be included, but since Delta owns Comair and ASA and all of their orders and options on the RJ's, I bet they can do whatever they want. Next you can sue them too. They own you. Say it three times. They own you. Your growth has been huge for the last two years. We may have alot of people on the street, so they will get into any new jets. Originally the 100 seaters were going to have mainline rates, but with 1260 out and possible more, now Dalpa will probably get the furloughs to fly them, at Comair rates---which is kinda sad, but what can we do? All I have to say is thank you to the Comair MEC---lawson. If he would have embraced the furloughs with open arms, he may have avoided all of this and eventually had preferrential hiring. Now the Comair growth will stop, and no preferrential hiring. My furloughed friends look forward to getting in those 70 seaters, they really do.
Bye Bye---General Lee
I don't know if you are privy to all of the negotiations right now between the pilots at Delta and management, but Delta will become leaner and meaner. Not only will the pilots give back something, but the other employee groups---including DCI---will be asked (the DL flt Attendants and Mechanics will be told) to give up some pay and benefits. I don't think the analysts have seen this yet, but we will probably have fares very close to Jetblue's, and then we will also have a better frequent flyer program (thanks to our recently approved codeshare with CO and NW). Our planes at Song will eventually (Oct) have better entertainment than jetblue, and we will actually have a marketing dept. that will have commercials etc to get the word out---something we don't really do right now. The costs will all be lower, and we will fly airplanes longer and more often to bring down the costs. Just watch.
As far as the new RJ's out there, you can bet that Dalpa will negotiate for 70 seaters and 90 seaters for furloughs at Comair's rates----and our VP of Flt Ops said they would like that. If Dalpa includes any extra furloughs in the concessions---you can bet that they would get 70 and 90 seaters for them to fly. I don't know if left seat on any new 50 seaters would be included, but since Delta owns Comair and ASA and all of their orders and options on the RJ's, I bet they can do whatever they want. Next you can sue them too. They own you. Say it three times. They own you. Your growth has been huge for the last two years. We may have alot of people on the street, so they will get into any new jets. Originally the 100 seaters were going to have mainline rates, but with 1260 out and possible more, now Dalpa will probably get the furloughs to fly them, at Comair rates---which is kinda sad, but what can we do? All I have to say is thank you to the Comair MEC---lawson. If he would have embraced the furloughs with open arms, he may have avoided all of this and eventually had preferrential hiring. Now the Comair growth will stop, and no preferrential hiring. My furloughed friends look forward to getting in those 70 seaters, they really do.
Bye Bye---General Lee
we will just have to disagree
I don't care if Delta flys them, thats not the point. I just don't see Delta paying a guy at mainline with all the benfits what DCI can do for less. They may not get Comair rates, they could get MESA rates. Race to the bottom, good to see you guys jump in. I think you would take a paycut just to screwover DCI.
You seem to think your MEC won't sell the junior guys out, we'll see. I predict an end to the 57 limit at DCI all to protect the pay at the top. As far as a job there, who cares. Those jobs are gone for all, forever.
I don't care if Delta flys them, thats not the point. I just don't see Delta paying a guy at mainline with all the benfits what DCI can do for less. They may not get Comair rates, they could get MESA rates. Race to the bottom, good to see you guys jump in. I think you would take a paycut just to screwover DCI.
You seem to think your MEC won't sell the junior guys out, we'll see. I predict an end to the 57 limit at DCI all to protect the pay at the top. As far as a job there, who cares. Those jobs are gone for all, forever.
FlyDeltasJets
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Posts
- 664
It is really interesting to see that some of the same people who criticize mesa for flying the rj for less money are quick to tell us that we could never fly the rj for more money. Couldn't we use the same argument about cmr now? How can they expect to operate the rj profitably while their pilots make so much more than mesa?
General Lee
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2002
- Posts
- 20,442
Flaps30,
The rates would be Comair rates--not mesa rates. IF Delta wants more than 57 total 70 seaters, which they do, they will have to let us fly them. We will allow them to pay Comair rates probably, and that will allow them to have more. Then the 90 or 100 seaters come into play, and they will probably pay more than the 70 seaters, but in a proportional way---with 20 or more seats etc. How is that going to hurt you guys again, besides the expansion part? If we buy the UAL Asian routes someday, that would add more jobs to mainline, and empty seats on the new 70 or 90 seaters. Hopefully there will be expansion someday and things will move again. I don't think guys would avoid being hired at Delta if they have to start in a 70 or 90 seat RJ. They are a lot better than old DC-9's.
This all comes down to one thing---Delta wants more 70 seaters now, and they wouldn't get them without Dalpa's approval. IF we are going to have more pilots out on the street, we should get them back into cockpits as soon as possible.
Bye Bye-----General Lee
The rates would be Comair rates--not mesa rates. IF Delta wants more than 57 total 70 seaters, which they do, they will have to let us fly them. We will allow them to pay Comair rates probably, and that will allow them to have more. Then the 90 or 100 seaters come into play, and they will probably pay more than the 70 seaters, but in a proportional way---with 20 or more seats etc. How is that going to hurt you guys again, besides the expansion part? If we buy the UAL Asian routes someday, that would add more jobs to mainline, and empty seats on the new 70 or 90 seaters. Hopefully there will be expansion someday and things will move again. I don't think guys would avoid being hired at Delta if they have to start in a 70 or 90 seat RJ. They are a lot better than old DC-9's.
This all comes down to one thing---Delta wants more 70 seaters now, and they wouldn't get them without Dalpa's approval. IF we are going to have more pilots out on the street, we should get them back into cockpits as soon as possible.
Bye Bye-----General Lee
HA25
Tokyo Tokyo!
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2001
- Posts
- 3,643
Re: Song succeed
Yeah, and while they're at it, they can go out and fuel the plane, and then later get out and drive the tug for the push back... heck why stop there, then they can taxi the plane to the main hangar at the end of the day and get out and clean the outside of the plane and dump the lavs.
Is this what you're idea of raising the bar is? It's bad enough with the economy applying pressure to our jobs, next thing you're gonna recommend is a voluntary free work day to boost margins.
where does it stop...
Rather than tell the Delta pilots to get out and clean their planes, you should be asking the SWA and JB pilots to quit lowering the bar.
pilotyip said:
Yeah, and while they're at it, they can go out and fuel the plane, and then later get out and drive the tug for the push back... heck why stop there, then they can taxi the plane to the main hangar at the end of the day and get out and clean the outside of the plane and dump the lavs.
Is this what you're idea of raising the bar is? It's bad enough with the economy applying pressure to our jobs, next thing you're gonna recommend is a voluntary free work day to boost margins.
where does it stop...
Rather than tell the Delta pilots to get out and clean their planes, you should be asking the SWA and JB pilots to quit lowering the bar.
General Lee said:Flaps30,
The rates would be Comair rates--not mesa rates. IF Delta wants more than 57 total 70 seaters, which they do, they will have to let us fly them. We will allow them to pay Comair rates probably, and that will allow them to have more. Then the 90 or 100 seaters come into play, and they will probably pay more than the 70 seaters, but in a proportional way---with 20 or more seats etc. How is that going to hurt you guys again, besides the expansion part? If we buy the UAL Asian routes someday, that would add more jobs to mainline, and empty seats on the new 70 or 90 seaters. Hopefully there will be expansion someday and things will move again. I don't think guys would avoid being hired at Delta if they have to start in a 70 or 90 seat RJ. They are a lot better than old DC-9's.
This all comes down to one thing---Delta wants more 70 seaters now, and they wouldn't get them without Dalpa's approval. IF we are going to have more pilots out on the street, we should get them back into cockpits as soon as possible.
Bye Bye-----General Lee
General, I don't know where you get your happy outlook. While I really don't care what happens at the mainline (as long as you DALPA guy's stay out of our business), I just don't know why you think DAL management gives a rat's a$$ about your pilots. For that matter, why do you think your senior pilots care what happens to the guys on furlough (I know a few that are close to retirement and they don't seem to care).
Why would you even think about concessions after what your management just did? I know we at ASA will not give concessions, we are making a pretty good profit, and expect to share in the good times here. While they last.
I see DAL headed to bankruptcy. The top management has already set themselves up for it. They are set no matter what happens. In bankruptcy they can lower your pay, end your retirement, change your work rules, and get all of the 70, 90, and 100 seat aircraft that Mesa or Chit can stand to fly. And they won't have to give you or me anything in return. Why pay you Comair rates, when they can pay you Mesa rates (oh yea, we will get them too).
wil
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2001
- Posts
- 488
justApilot
Dawn Patroller
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2002
- Posts
- 346
Blue Dude
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2003
- Posts
- 848
Re: Re: Song succeed
I don't believe this. Nowhere in my job duties does it say that we have to help clean the cabin. Some pilots do, some don't. Sometimes you'd like to help out but are just too busy, it happens. Sometimes you just don't feel like it and get busy with something else. What you don't see are people with free time on their hands during a quick turn standing there with their arms folded watching other people work, with the "it's not my job" attitude. If voluntarily pitching in to clean out seatbacks and straighten seat belts, when I have the extra three minutes it takes, is considered lowering the bar, then so be it. I'd much rather lower the bar then arrogantly assume that turning the aircraft is everyone else's responsibility but mine, or assume that such simple quick work is beneath me. It's a matter of attitude, not "lowering the bar".
This is typical hysterical slippery-slope crap. You don't want to get your hands dirty to help turn the aircraft, so you invent rationales like this. Are you trained to fuel a plane, drive a tug, or wash a plane? Do you think the company would be willing to pay your base rate while you do these things when someone else would do them for 10% of that? Do you see how far fetched such hand wringing really is?
Nobody is going to ask you to do any of that. But you do have hands and the ability to toss pillows. You don't have to be trained for it, and you don't have to do it. But it would help and your cabin crew would appreciate it. That's really all there is to it. No doubt you're too good for such plebian work. Way to go, Skygod. If your attitude is typical across the Song workforce, Song doesn't have a chance.
V70T5 said:
I don't believe this. Nowhere in my job duties does it say that we have to help clean the cabin. Some pilots do, some don't. Sometimes you'd like to help out but are just too busy, it happens. Sometimes you just don't feel like it and get busy with something else. What you don't see are people with free time on their hands during a quick turn standing there with their arms folded watching other people work, with the "it's not my job" attitude. If voluntarily pitching in to clean out seatbacks and straighten seat belts, when I have the extra three minutes it takes, is considered lowering the bar, then so be it. I'd much rather lower the bar then arrogantly assume that turning the aircraft is everyone else's responsibility but mine, or assume that such simple quick work is beneath me. It's a matter of attitude, not "lowering the bar".
This is typical hysterical slippery-slope crap. You don't want to get your hands dirty to help turn the aircraft, so you invent rationales like this. Are you trained to fuel a plane, drive a tug, or wash a plane? Do you think the company would be willing to pay your base rate while you do these things when someone else would do them for 10% of that? Do you see how far fetched such hand wringing really is?
Nobody is going to ask you to do any of that. But you do have hands and the ability to toss pillows. You don't have to be trained for it, and you don't have to do it. But it would help and your cabin crew would appreciate it. That's really all there is to it. No doubt you're too good for such plebian work. Way to go, Skygod. If your attitude is typical across the Song workforce, Song doesn't have a chance.
FlyDeltasJets
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Posts
- 664
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
