CMR/ASA pilots to talk w/ Grinstein

[General Lee]

Everyone I have talked to over here at mainline thinks there shoud be a merger between ASA/Comair---it seems logical. Some of those costs savings could help the overall picture. Maybe they have other plans.....


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[737 Pylt]

Why should Comair pilots fall over themselves supporting DAL mainline pilots when the only thing that Delta mainline pilots have done is attempt to prevent Comair growth and transfer Comair aircraft to Delta?

Wil:
Do you even read what you type. Your BS is even funnier here than it is on the ALPA national forum! Who has had all the growth over the past 3 years??
Not to mention, did my post say anything about bumping Comair pilots out of thier jobs. Just some nice support like ASA did for furloughed mainline pilots would have been nice. I see where Comair stands!
Again, have a nice day Wil!
737

 

[surplus1]

Wil:
Do you even read what you type. Your BS is even funnier here than it is on the ALPA national forum!

Yes, I read what I type and I also read what you type. I'm pleased that you enjoy the humor of my posts.

Who has had all the growth over the past 3 years??

And your point is? Are we expected to request your permission to grow? If I were you I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen. Should we feel "guilty" because we have grown? You'd like that wouldn't you? Are you prepared to feel "guilty" when you grow and we do not? Do you feel "guilty" when your leaders attempt to stop our growth? You don't? Geeez, I'm surprised and dissapointed.

Tell you what, I'll cry in my beer over your problems as soon as you agree to cry in your beer over mine. Meanwhile, I think it's time that you realize that you only think you're a privileged class, you really aren't.

Not to mention, did my post say anything about bumping Comair pilots out of thier jobs. Just some nice support like ASA did for furloughed mainline pilots would have been nice. I see where Comair stands!
Again, have a nice day Wil!
737

Comair stands the same place that you stand. Your interests are more important to you than mine; my interests are more important to me than yours. If you don't comprehend that, I can't help you.

If you would like to send a thankyougram to ASA management for its help it will not upset me. If you want to send a nastygram to CMR management because it didn't, I have no problem with that either.

I don't hold you responsible for what your management does, only for what you you do. Grind your axe with the right party. Your group doesn't get upset over my problems and I don't get upset over yours. In other words, we work for separate airlines. That is what you wanted and that is what you got. Quit complaining about the consequences.

You have a nice day too, sir.

 

[General Lee]

Surplus1,


I think you have forgotten what your purpose here at Delta is. Comair and ASA FEED mainline, and also offer some point to point flights. But, your primary responsibility is to feed us at the hubs. You are second on the totempole. Sorry about that, but it is true. After 9-11 you guys did a great job "backing us up"--by filling in the gaps and expanding like a wildfire in California. Now, the passengers are actually back---and it is time for us to come back in numbers and with the growth. You don't want to give up your growth---and that is obvious. Some of you would like to bring larger aircraft down to the regional level---and that would bring down the benefits and pay also. Guys like Furloughedagain can see the big picture--and others can't.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[InclusiveScope]

Surplus1,

I think you have forgotten what your purpose here at Delta is. Comair and ASA FEED mainline, and also offer some point to point flights. But, your primary responsibility is to feed us at the hubs. You are second on the totempole. Sorry about that, but it is true.

Bye Bye--General Lee

General,
You, nor any other Delta pilot will tell me what my purpose is. You will not tell me what my responsibility is. I will not accept being "second on the totempole". Sorry about that General, but that is the truth.

 

[AFELLOWAVIATOR]

Surplus1,


I think you have forgotten what your purpose here at Delta is. Comair and ASA FEED mainline, and also offer some point to point flights. But, your primary responsibility is to feed us at the hubs. You are second on the totempole. Sorry about that, but it is true. After 9-11 you guys did a great job "backing us up"--by filling in the gaps and expanding like a wildfire in California. Now, the passengers are actually back---and it is time for us to come back in numbers and with the growth. You don't want to give up your growth---and that is obvious. Some of you would like to bring larger aircraft down to the regional level---and that would bring down the benefits and pay also. Guys like Furloughedagain can see the big picture--and others can't.

Bye Bye--General Lee

AGAIN, I challenge you to tell me , in your opinion, the difference in what an RJ does and a 737 does for Delta.

They both FEED THE HUB. plain and simple. The 737 does not sit at the gate waiting on pax to get off RJs no more than an RJ sits at the gate waiting on pax to get off 737s.

They both wait for a mix of local pax and pax that have flown in on RJs, 737s, MD88s, 767s, ect. ect....

DCI has around 350 DEPARTURES a day at CVG. Who "feeds" those flights? I quess they all go out empty and then return with pax that only connect to mainline.

I know you know this. When you say we only "feed" mainline, you sound like our anti-labor mgt.

 

[AFELLOWAVIATOR]

Just for the record, GG never said that he would talk to our MECs. In fact, his response was more of a blow off than anything. He refered them to Koshlap (spelling?), and stated he agreed with Buttrells response as to the reasons that they would not consider a merger.

I don't know where our MECs got the idea from. He stated in a news conf. this morn that a merger was out of the question.

 

[Torpid]

Surplus1,


I think you have forgotten what your purpose here at Delta is. Comair and ASA FEED mainline, and also offer some point to point flights. But, your primary responsibility is to feed us at the hubs. You are second on the totempole. Sorry about that, but it is true. After 9-11 you guys did a great job "backing us up"--by filling in the gaps and expanding like a wildfire in California. Now, the passengers are actually back---and it is time for us to come back in numbers and with the growth. You don't want to give up your growth---and that is obvious. Some of you would like to bring larger aircraft down to the regional level---and that would bring down the benefits and pay also. Guys like Furloughedagain can see the big picture--and others can't.

Bye Bye--General Lee

For once, I think the General is right. I too work at a regional (not ASA or Comair) and I would like to see nothing more than our mainline have some solid growth. When they grow, we grow. Several years ago, our mainline partner took over many of our routes because they saw that we had departures every half hour that were full. They soon realized that a full 30 seat airplane didn't translate into a full 737 so eventually we got the routes back, but my point is we were put in to test the waters and the demand was there. If we get to a point where we are pushed to capacity, thats when mainline should come in and put their planes on that route. They should and do use us as test flights. Mainline can put a 50 seat RJ into a market and see if it sticks. If it turns out to be a high demand for our services in that market, than mainline should put there planes on those routes. If the demand only calls for a 50 seat RJ, than we can keep those routes.

Solid growth at mainline means solid growth at our company and better opportunities for me in the future

 

[737 Pylt]

OK, I'll try this in S L O W M O T I O N !!!

Yes, I read what I type

It's obvious you don'!

Tell you what, I'll cry in my beer over your problems as soon as you agree to cry in your beer over mine. Meanwhile, I think it's time that you realize that you only think you're a privileged class, you really aren't.

Don't waste perfectly good beer by crying over it. Can you please explain wher I said I thought I was a privileged class?? Again DO YOU READ WHAT YOU TYPE?? OBVIOUSLY NOT!!

Comair stands the same place that you stand. Your interests are more important to you than mine; my interests are more important to me than yours. If you don't comprehend that, I can't help you.

I have no problem there, we agree on that!

If you would like to send a thankyougram to ASA management for its help it will not upset me. If you want to send a nastygram to CMR management because it didn't, I have no problem with that either.

My only point here was that the ASA MEC supported the hiring of furloughed pilots (without having to resign seniority) while YOUR MEC did not!
I'll not waste my time on writing letters, this is more amusing.

I don't hold you responsible for what your management does, only for what you you do. Grind your axe with the right party. Your group doesn't get upset over my problems and I don't get upset over yours. In other words, we work for separate airlines. That is what you wanted and that is what you got. Quit complaining about the consequences..

Again Wil, the point is that the regionals grew at the expense of the majors. Hey when we get hired at an airline, we know this thing goes in cycles, always has, now traffic is back, and the flying needs to return to mainline. Even our wonderful CEO admits Leo over did it with the usage of rj's on long flights. I know that the rj has its place, however, its not on a 4 hour leg!

You have a nice day too, sir..

I will,
and again,
Have a nice day Wil.
737

 

[surplus1]

Surplus1,
I think you have forgotten what your purpose here at Delta is. Comair and ASA FEED mainline, and also offer some point to point flights. But, your primary responsibility is to feed us at the hubs.

General, that is your opinion and the mantra of your group. It is presumptious and specious. Otherwise, it has little to do with reality. If your company had created my little airline you might have a point, but the fact is it didn't. You bought us, but you didn't create us.

Given the fact that we carried a higher percentage of our own passengers vs those "connecting" to your airplanes before you bought us and, to the best of my knowledge, we still do (60/40 roughly), there is considerable question as to who feeds whom. Realistically, that is all irrelevant.

We don't feed you and you don't feed us. We operate in different markets. That doesn't mean we go to different airports. It means that you fly between points and at times when the market (supply of passengers) warrants the size aircraft that your company operates. We operate between airports and at times when the supply of passengers matches the capacity of our equipment. The equation is not about "feed", it is about having the right size equipment for any existing market. Frequency is also a factor in serving a particular market. The customer, who pays your salary and mine, prefers 4 RJ flights between two points to one 737 flight. You and I don't decide that either, market forces do.

Although I understand why you would like to be the determinant of who we are, why we exist and what we should or should not do, the truth is you aren't. You can make yourself feel good with the illusion but it has no impact on reality. The market, not Delta pilots, not the Delta MEC and not ALPA, is what determines where we go, how often we do it and how many of these pesky little airplanes that we fly will be in the fleet. If you can reach that understanding instead of worrying about who is first or second on your fictional totem pole. It's not about your ego or mine, it's about producing revenue that exceeds expenses. At this point we are doing that and you are not. This isn't rocket science, General.

You are second on the totempole. Sorry about that, but it is true. After 9-11 you guys did a great job "backing us up"--by filling in the gaps and expanding like a wildfire in California.

I, and I think most of my peers, are fully aware that Delta's core business is the mainline. We really don't have a problem with that, and we're not nearly as concerned about the image of who is where on and imaginary totempole. Totem poles are related only to your egos and really have nothing to do with Delta's business. If you want to be first on the totempole, that's OK with us. All of "DCI" is only half your size. If you wan't to see yourself as "king of the hill", that's allright, it has nothing to do with how many airplanes of what size the company operates, and nothing to do with who flys them.

We haven't done any better job of "backing you up" since 9-11 than we did before 9-11. We were not backing you up then and we are not backing you up now. That thought process is just one more of your illusions. We have a different market, that's all. 9/11 did create a big change in the supply of passengers in many markets. Unfortunately for you, and fortunately for us, that market change redered a lot of your size aircraft economically unfeasible between a number of points, including the company's hubs. The supply of your product exceeded the demand for service. That is why we grew and you shrunk. This is a business General. It's purpose is to make money for the investors. Neither one of us exists so that we can enjoy flying airplanes of our preference. That's another thing that you folks seem to have difficulty in grasping.

The Company has to be able to operate the right size aircraft on each of its routes. You should have no role in deciding what that is and neither should we. When that aircraft is of a size allocated to you, it will operate on that route and you will fly it. When the appropriate size is an aircraft allocated to us it will operate on that route and we will fly it. I say again, it's not rocket science.

Your real problem isn't what aircraft is the right size and I know that. Your problem is that you resent the fact that we are flying the smaller jets because you think you should be doing it instead. When you attempt to make that happen, at our expense, that's when we come to a parting of the ways.

Now, the passengers are actually back---and it is time for us to come back in numbers and with the growth. You don't want to give up your growth---and that is obvious.

I'm glad the passengers are coming back and hope their number continues to increase. When that calls for the use of one of your aircraft on a given route, we have no problem with that. If the Company can make more money between A/B with the 737 than the CR7, use the 737. If that need requires 100 more 737s that's just fine. We have no objection to your growing and never have, that attitude is your bag.

You are the ones that object to our growth and you are the ones that consistently attempt to stop it. We object to that because it is artificial. Of course we would like to continue to grow, just as you would. The difference is that we are not trying to prevent your growth, we are willing to live with the dictates of the market. You are doing the opposite. You seek to prevent our growth regardless of the market. That we are unwilling to accept. Additionally, we think it's kind of dense.

Some of you would like to bring larger aircraft down to the regional level---and that would bring down the benefits and pay also.
Bye Bye--General Lee

We have made no effort to bring larger aircraft down to the regional level. Up to now, that is a false allegation and represents only your fears. On the other hand, you are actively engaged in attempting to bring our small aircraft into your tent and without us. If you continue to do that, eventually you will cause what you fear. In other words you will wind up forcing us to vie with you for the larger aircraft, just as you are now vying with us for the small aircraft that we fly. If you're really worried about bringing down the pay and benefits, stop trying to get the samll aircraft.

The most simple solution to all of this is for you to stay on your side of the fence and we will stay on our side. You fly the big airplanes, we fly the small ones. Don't tell us how many little planes we should have and we wont tell you how many big planes you should have. Let the market decide. Then we can all live happily ever after.

The fence is at 70 seats. It's an arbitrary line, but we did not contest it so we can accept it. You have crossed that line by attempting to move the fence to 50-seats and limit the number of 70-seaters, after the fact. That is unacceptable and will continue to be. If you continue to pursue that course of action it will result in attempts by us to move the fence to 100 seats. That's not something we want to do, it is something your actions may force us to do. If that should happen, the war we're in now will look like a grade school spitting contest compared to the war that will come. As soon as you give up your efforts to restrict the 70-seaters, the conflict will go away.

You've heard this before time and again and I have heard your story time and again. Nothing has changed. Now, you can go hug the totempole and worry about your position on it or you can get real and deal with the issues. I don't believe in totempoles, they are primitive symbols of mythical beliefs.

 

[surplus1]

My only point here was that the ASA MEC supported the hiring of furloughed pilots (without having to resign seniority) while YOUR MEC did not!

That may be your point but your point is not accurate. The ASA MEC did nothing to promote the hiring of your furloughed pilots. It simply did not object to a management decision. If Comair management had made the same decision, the CMR MEC would not have objected either. We simply had no reason to fall on our sword to make that happen. This is a dead horse.

Again Wil, the point is that the regionals grew at the expense of the majors. Hey when we get hired at an airline, we know this thing goes in cycles, always has, now traffic is back, and the flying needs to return to mainline. Even our wonderful CEO admits Leo over did it with the usage of rj's on long flights. I know that the rj has its place, however, its not on a 4 hour leg!

Again, your "point" is in left field. The regionals did not grow at the expense of the majors. Your inability to understand market forces produces this erroneous assumption. We both grow or shrink dependent solely upon the needs of the given market. I'm sorry your side shrank, but trying to make the regionals your scapegoat because you don't want to face reality is your problem.

If and when the company decides that the stage lengths should be changed, it will change them and we will live with that. It is not your responsibility to make that determination. If traffic is back and it warrants a change in equipment from an RJ to a 737, that's OK with us and we will live with that. Again, market forces and management will make that decison, not you. If the company buys you 100 new 737s tomorrow, we'll be happy for you. If they buy us 100 new CR7s will you be happy for us?

Why is it so difficult for you all to understand that the business does not revolve around your desires of what you should fly,when you should fly it or where you should fly it? Since you know "this thing" runs in cycles, accept the fact that your side of the fence is on a down cycle and ours is on an up cylcle. When the cycle changes, you may grow again and we may shrink. You don't control the cycles and neither do we. Quit trying to artificailly manipulate them to your benefit.

You know what ... as soon as you fellas stop trying to be the CEO and run the company things will get better for you. Your job is the same as mine, to fly airplanes allocated to our respective divisions of the company. Stop trying to run the business;that's way above your pay grade.

All the best.

 

[737 Pylt]

you just don't get it!

Since you know "this thing" runs in cycles, accept the fact that your side of the fence is on a down cycle and ours is on an up cylcle. When the cycle changes, you may grow again and we may shrink. You don't control the cycles and neither do we. Quit trying to artificailly manipulate them to your benefit.


All the best.

DOWN CYCLE?? YGTBSM!!!

DAL is now flying more passengers than the summer of 2001 (the busiest season in aviation history) and you say that it is on a down cycle! Every expert out there is telling us the recession is over, more people are flying now more than ever. People are getting bumped off flights (my last 4 day trip, I counted only 5 empty seats), and load factors are skyrocketing, and you say that we are on a down cycle??
It just proves my point you are not reading what you type Wil!
Any credibility you might have had was just flushed with that statement!
Have a nice day!
737

 

[MedFlyer]

DOWN CYCLE?? YGTBSM!!!

DAL is now flying more passengers than the summer of 2001 (the busiest season in aviation history) and you say that it is on a down cycle! Every expert out there is telling us the recession is over, more people are flying now more than ever. People are getting bumped off flights (my last 4 day trip, I counted only 5 empty seats), and load factors are skyrocketing, and you say that we are on a down cycle??
It just proves my point you are not reading what you type Wil!
Any credibility you might have had was just flushed with that statement!
Have a nice day!
737

Sorry, but you kind of ruined your own credibility by posting false information. The summer of 2001 was NOT the busiest season in aviation for DL. DL's traffic was already sliding in 2001....the summer of 2000 was the pinnacle for DL.

Second, while the passengers are coming back, yields are still at record lows. In fact, on most routes, people are paying less today than they did at the height of the recession 2-3 years ago. So in terms of yields, we are still in down cycle which is more of a permanent shift than a cycle.

 

[surplus1]

DOWN CYCLE?? YGTBSM!!!

DAL is now flying more passengers than the summer of 2001 (the busiest season in aviation history) and you say that it is on a down cycle! Every expert out there is telling us the recession is over, more people are flying now more than ever. People are getting bumped off flights (my last 4 day trip, I counted only 5 empty seats), and load factors are skyrocketing, and you say that we are on a down cycle??
It just proves my point you are not reading what you type Wil!
Any credibility you might have had was just flushed with that statement!
Have a nice day!
737

My friend if you want to call what's happening at Delta an up cycle, that's ok with me. The record losses posted every quarter, most recent 312 billions, would appear to indicate otherwise. The number of passengers flying have increased, but the revenue they produce has declined and costs are out of control. Your expenses exceed your income and there is no end in sight. Now if you see that as a rosy picture, it is not my credibility that we need to worry about, it is your understanding of the process.

You seem to think that I am anti-Delta. Well, I'm not. I agree that I'm not very bright but I have figured out that Delta owns the company I work for. As Delta goes, so do we. I have no stake in seeing Delta fail, in fact the exact opposite is true.

What all of you folks with the 737s need to do is understand that the industry has changed. I don't like the changes any more than you do, but they are there and do not seem to be going away. The glory days of yesterday when you could demand and get whatever you wanted are a thing of the past. The problem you have is refered to as "denial". You won't accept that it is not going to return to the "good old days". The company has to come up with a new business plan and they are trying. You and your group have to change your way of thinking. Like it or not you have to become a part of that plan, help to make it work and pray to whomever you like that they get it right. If they don't, this company won't make it.

That is more than a down cycle, it's a major sea change. Either we trim the ship for this weather or it will founder. Right now, you are a major liability and that is why the company is demanding the concessions. The serious people in your pilot group recognize that you have to make changes and they are making good proposals. When it's settled it's going to hurt but there simply is no choice.

Today the company deferred a number of aircraft deliveries. That's not good for pilots but it is necessary. If the revenue was there to make those new aircraft profitable the deliveries would not have been defered.

I'm not asking you to be happy about any of this but I don't understand why you seem to have a chip on your shoulder. We are in the same boat and we need to row in the same direction. Rowing in circles will solve nothing.

Take care.

 

[737 Pylt]

Sorry, but you kind of ruined your own credibility by posting false information. The summer of 2001 was NOT the busiest season in aviation for DL. DL's traffic was already sliding in 2001....the summer of 2000 was the pinnacle for DL.

OK, I'm wrong about the year, but not about load factors, and that is the issue I have with Wil. Fact remains, we are still having "record load factors." and transporting those record load factors in regional jets! Its time to start replacing 10 flights a day where there are rj's and putting on some MD88's and 737's

Second, while the passengers are coming back, yields are still at record lows.

I never mentioned yeilds. But while you're on the subject, maybe you can enlighten us why its $20 cheaper to fly on Song NYC-MIA than it is to take Greyhound??

 

[Palerider957]

I never mentioned yeilds. But while you're on the subject, maybe you can enlighten us why its $20 cheaper to fly on Song NYC-MIA than it is to take Greyhound??[/QUOTE]


Simple....because Greyhound has more pricing power then Delta Airlines...easy enough?

How many times does load factor vs. yield have to be explained on these boards?

 

[InclusiveScope]

Simple....because Greyhound has more pricing power then Delta Airlines...easy enough?

How many times does load factor vs. yield have to be explained on these boards?

Well said Palerider. These guys still think load factor translates into profit. I am convinced the average Delta pilot looks back from the cockpit to determine profitablilty. Never mind that 30 or so passengers are non-revs and many of the revenue passengers aren't paying enough to operate the flight. These guys need a lesson in Econ 101

 

[InclusiveScope]

I never mentioned yeilds. But while you're on the subject, maybe you can enlighten us why its $20 cheaper to fly on Song NYC-MIA than it is to take Greyhound??

737 Pylt, I think you just answered your own question. Tell me again about the load factor with fares lower than Greyhound....

 

[P38JLightning]

loads v/s yields, etc

Not trying to speak for 737 pylt, but IMO the fact that sometimes its cheaper to fly song than greyhound doesn't mean song can't possibly make money. I think Song set its prices to make a profit, but they need a certain high yield factor. its also cleaper to fly SWA than greyhound on some routes, and SWA is profitable because they are packed to the gills.

Of course Inclusive Scope is right too, simply being full doesn't mean being profitable. In fact I remember an article fro a couple years back (featuring Continental if I recall, but it applies to everyone) who'se point was (especially if you oversell or overbook) that anything beyond about an 85% company wide load factor gets you into the "region of reverse command" whereby you start losing more money the higher the load factor.

Now obviously you want an exact 100% on any one given flight, but if your system wide loads are, say 95%, despite the fact that some of your flights are only half full, or mostly empty, basically repositioning flights, etc, then the only way you are 95% system wide is you have a ton of 100%+ flights and droves of pax you have to pay to not fly. Overselling can be a profitable endevour if its done in moderation, but if done on a lot of flights where a lot of the no shows actually show it gets expensive.

Song has a low CASM and the ability to compete and be profitable, and in fact are profitable sometimes, but they are dependant on loads to be high. The 75 is efficient with a lot of seats to spread the costs around, minimal flight attendants, quicker turns, higher utilization and soon significantly lower crew costs. Plus miles on a world wide network. A much better perk than any of the LCCs. They're still new, without the brand recognition of SWA or AT in Atlanta or even JB in NYC. But just because sometimes a ticket is cheaper than the bus doesn't mean they can't make a profit. Otherwise SWA would have liquidated 30 years ago.

 

[cosmotheassman]

It seems everyone is losing sight of the big picture and, it is the company's fault for this happening. Everyone should be working as a team for the greater good. Delta having multiple companies with multiple senority lists within itself was a bad choice. It only puts you guys against each other whether it's good times or bad times. The only solution was for Delta to be one entity; now it is a victim of its own creation. And, I believe, it got too big for its own shorts. I believe if Delta needs to cut back, it should be on everyone proportional to its own size.(and if profits are being made, everyone should benefit proportionally)

This is what I don't understand: A first year Delta F/O makes 66% more an hour than an ASA FO. Does Delta mainline do greater than 60% of the total flying for Delta? I don't think they should make the same but, when you get past 5th year it is ridiculous how much difference in pay for two people working for the same company doing the same job.
Just my 2 cents...