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

Delta in LAX

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
We are hearing now that SOC could happen a year from now (Jan, 10), and I would think that if NWA will be parking their 742s "within a year", then a displacement bid on the NWA side would happen prior to that.

I think it is unlikely DAL would go through the expense of putting the 747-200 on its certificate and than park the fleet. My guess is that the 747-200s will be parked prior to SOC, but if I'm wrong, than 747-200 pilots have every right to execute their seniority as they see fit. It sucks whenever anyone gets displaced, but we're one pilot group now. We have one contract and one list. We need to stop seeing each other as former this or former that.
 
I think it is unlikely DAL would go through the expense of putting the 747-200 on its certificate and than park the fleet. My guess is that the 747-200s will be parked prior to SOC, but if I'm wrong, than 747-200 pilots have every right to execute their seniority as they see fit. It sucks whenever anyone gets displaced, but we're one pilot group now. We have one contract and one list. We need to stop seeing each other as former this or former that.


I understand that. But, we ALL knew it was coming. And, I also know we are all "brothers and sisters" now, but even the neutrals knew something like this could happen, and that is why they stated that should a mass parking occur, it would affect that particular group prior to SOC. The DL pilots did not cause the cargo business to dry up. It is unfortunate, but neither of us can do anything about it, except to know what is "fair and just."


Bye Bye--General Lee
 
We all knew a merger was coming in 07' but some of your 08' newbies still got to enjoy a leapfrog. Fair is fair.

NWA pilots didn't either. The merged management decided not to continue.

Heyas Clippy,

Yup. While there is language in the AWARD portion of the SLI opinion (which is the only part that matters) regarding replacement aircraft, there's nothing in it about "gee willikers, we thought something like this might happen, soo we don't think it's fair".

If guys are displaced after SOC, they go wherever.

It is what it is, and it cuts both ways.

Nu
 
I see you point, I don't agree but I see it. If it happens after SOC and I got the seniority, then I plan on displacing someone out of LAX.

If the 742 is parked after SOC, how does the no bump/flush clause works? The last displacement bid has already flushed some junior folks out of LAX, by VD/MD from other surplus categories.

If a displacement bid comes out after SOC that includes the 742, can any FNWA VD/MD any FDAL out of his current category? I thought for any FNWA to enter a FDAL base (and vice versa) is through AE vacancies, is that correct? I've already lost my base, and i feel my ticket back home is getting slimmer as we get closer to SOC. Once SOC completes, most of us that are out of their intended dormiciles may have to wait a while before our seniority can holds it again. (Would be nice if they extend our reinstatement period:) I'm just praying that the rumored SEA base will take shape soon!
 
Heyas Clippy,

Yup. While there is language in the AWARD portion of the SLI opinion (which is the only part that matters) regarding replacement aircraft, there's nothing in it about "gee willikers, we thought something like this might happen, soo we don't think it's fair".

If guys are displaced after SOC, they go wherever.

It is what it is, and it cuts both ways.

Nu

If this truly is what the Neutrals thought about the 74F cargo operation, then I guess we should bring that back to their attention if and when we arbitrate again.....(with them, mind you)

After looking at all the facts, neutral arbitrators stated the following concerning the aging 747F fleet at NWA:

"Questions exist, as well, as to the future of Northwest freighter business both from an equipment standpoint and in terms of the general business outlook. The 747-200 freighters attached to that enterprise are uncompetitive in an increasingly competitive arena for cargo operations and it is unclear to what extent this would have remained a vital operation for NWA.28 Market conditions have changed dramatically since 2005, when demand for air cargo lift was high, particularly on routes from Asia to America.29 NWA has encountered a meaningful drop-off in demand in several of the routes served by NWA.30 Fuel prices have caused the 25-year-old Northwest 747’s to be uneconomic, Chinese carriers are providing more competition and NWA has dropped its daily service to Guangzhou, China.31 . In addition to being less fuel-efficient, the 747’s in the NWA fleet are smaller and have a shorter range than the 747-400’s flown by competitors. 32 The reduction in the freight fleet has been from 14 airplanes down to 10 and block hours have been decreased by 60%.33 As of September of 2008, Northwest has dropped Narita/Bangkok, Singapore/Hong Kong, Narita/Manila, Narita/Taipei, Shanghai/Anchorage, Bangkok/Singapore, and Hong Kong/Manila.34



Bye Bye--General Lee
 
"Questions exist, as well, as to the future of Northwest freighter business both from an equipment standpoint and in terms of the general business outlook.

No question anymore.....It was merged management that made that decision.

Fue
l prices have caused the 25-year-old Northwest 747’s to be uneconomic

Times changed, fuel is at $40 a barrel. Fuel was $100+ a barrel at the time this statement was made.

The reduction in the freight fleet has been from 14 airplanes down to 10 and block hours have been decreased by 60%.33 As of September of 2008

This was after the merger announcement which the arbitrators said was the dividing line between the two carriers.

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
 
Heyas Clippy,

Yea, I don't see anything in the award about the disposition of displacements AFTER SOC. It's just not in there. So like FDJ says, the JPWA will apply.

As for the award, there's the list. There's fences for some airplanes. There's a no bump'n'flush BECAUSE of the award. There's some replacement language. There's a furlough fence for "pre-SOC". There's a bit about dispute resolution. That's about it.

You can certainly arbitrate terms that are part of the award, like what exactly is a "replacement" aircraft. But you can't arbitrate something that is NOT in the award.

It's too bad GL thinks it's not fair. If the arbitrators thought so too, there would have been award language to support that conclusion. There's not. It might be one of those "equity trade-offs" we keep hearing about that is used to justify a double digit seniority percentile shifts down the road.

Well, anyway, here is my advice:

If it happens post-soc, proceed direct LAX.

If it happens pre-soc, put yourself in a position where you have minimal freeze time, and extract a paid move if you can. If we're still under the APA system, think about going to an airplane that you're already qualed on, so you don't get much of a freeze. If we're under the AE system, get yourself in a position where you can VD or MD out and bump into LAX after SOC.

Remember that there is really minimal recall-rights language in the JPWA, so that works to your advantage.

Problem solved.

Nu
 
Last edited:
Heyas Clippy,

Yea, I don't see anything in the award about the disposition of displacements AFTER SOC. It's just not in there. So like FDJ says, the JPWA will apply.

As for the award, there's the list. There's fences for some airplanes. There's a no bump'n'flush BECAUSE of the award. There's some replacement language. There's a furlough fence for "pre-SOC". There's a bit about dispute resolution. That's about it.

You can certainly arbitrate terms that are part of the award, like what exactly is a "replacement" aircraft. But you can't arbitrate something that is NOT in the award.

It's too bad GL thinks it's not fair. If the arbitrators thought so too, there would have been award language to support that conclusion. There's not. It might be one of those "equity trade-offs" we keep hearing about that is used to justify a double digit seniority percentile shifts down the road.

Well, anyway, here is my advice:

If it happens post-soc, proceed direct LAX.

If it happens pre-soc, put yourself in a position where you have minimal freeze time, and extract a paid move if you can. If we're still under the APA system, think about going to an airplane that you're already qualed on, so you don't get much of a freeze. If we're under the AE system, get yourself in a position where you can VD or MD out and bump into LAX after SOC.

Remember that there is really minimal recall-rights language in the JPWA, so that works to your advantage.

Problem solved.

Nu

Nu is probably right, and FDJ2 is also probably right when he said he thought it would go pre-SOC, so as not to incur the costs of placing a fleet on the certificate that will go away anyway. This is all probably moot.


Bye Bye---General Lee
 
Last edited:

Latest resources

Back
Top