Delta looking at 24-30 more narrowbody orders? Article

[xjhawk]

Karma-yes, it was a long drawn out bitch session. I agree with you about the comment it being a business decision-it was brilliant. Delta will make a lot of money off of Pinnacle. I just dont have to like it was on the back of me and my fellow pilots, most of whom do not want to still be at a regional. Oh, and I agree with most-I wanted scope tightened up as more flying needs to be at the major level. It would be nicer if our jobs could be lost after everyone starts hiring...

General- who am I mad at? I should think its ALPA National and our MEC for going along with them for the seniority integration. Block is a product of ALPA's lack of a fair policy. The sale of Mesaba to Pinnacle and the inept leadership at Pinnacle is what led to the Pinnacle bankruptcy. Nothing can be proven but its amazing how this is working out to Deltas favor. Its the same version when NWA stopped making payments to Mesaba while continuing to pay Pinnacle-forcing Mesaba into bankruptcy. If Delta just wanted to protect its feed and did not have another agenda it would have allowed the deal that would have happened between Pinnacle and United to operate the fleet of Q's. That agenda? I am sure there is no paper trail but I am assuming it was to take control of Pinnacle. Keeping the Q fleet operating for United would have been profitable and in the best interest of an independent Pinnacle corp and its employees. But that was shot down by a threat to pull DIP financing. Hey, I appreciate the DIP financing Delta provided but I should think that something prevented other money from being allowed to support Pinnacle as we reorganized. That something was Delta and the leadership of Pinnacle who have been doing what Delta said to do. Spanjers has done what NWA/Delta told him to do and I am sure the same can be said about the board. brilliant business on Anderson's/Delta's part.

That being said-I agree with you on most of your posts. I do not think your pilot group caved on scope-I think it was a step in the right direction and as for the future of Delta-your pilot group is a lot smarter than most as they see the health and profitability of your airline in their best interest. While other airlines want to strangle their airlines with the highest pay etc.... Thanks for the insight. I also understand that ALPA at the major level had teeth-it is about useless at the regional level as there is no teeth in negotiations and other elements within ALPA negotiating against the welfare of regional pilots-I will say again-I am for mainline scope and the parking of the 50 seaters but i am not for losing my house taking a downgrade when I live in one of the cheapest places in minneapolis-our top pay as an FO is about $36 an hour

 

[General Lee]

XJHawk,

I don't want you to make low wages, I want you to get on with mainline if you want and enjoy upward progression and variety of fleets and destinations, all with higher wages. You have been down a tough road, but hopefully you will get to where you want to be as soon as possible. I think all 3 legacies will be hiring tons in the next few years, and I recall you have some PIC, which is good. Keep networking and eventually you will get to where you want to be.



Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[FDJ2]

I don't follow you. Please explain.

If I have to explain, then you don't understand section 1 of the Delta pilot contract.

 

[FDJ2]

DCI had way too many 50s and Anderson knew it and was going to take care of it. They were going no matter what, it was just a question of HOW.

Ooops, not quite right. It was a question of WHEN and under what terms.

 

[jynxyjericho]

I don't need to convince you, but you know it is the truth. Your company and others initially got your Surge 9s thanks to DL's BK problems,

Factually incorrect, we got our CRJ-900's from NWA, and the flow and backflow that came with it as an agreement with the pilots and NWA for increasing the number of 76seaters at the regional level outside their scope allowance.

and during that time pilot contracts were changed while the judge watched (you probably know that by now). It's not fun. The key part here is that a large portion of your flying will go away with the 50 seaters, but the routes won't, meaning your Surge 9s will start flying to those city pairs, trying to squeeze a profit where the 50s could not due to higher gas. Even RA stated in an article that 50 seat RJs shouldn't be flying from ATL to Buffulo, rather ATL to Albany, GA. So, remaining 50 seaters will be doing that, and other current 50 seat markets will see your Surge 9s. Then typical current Surge 9 routes will finally once again see mainline equipment, like they did back when those DC9-10s used to fly the skys.

That has yet to be seen. Historically that hasn't been the case, historically they just drop flying into an (i.e.) Albany GA and let another carrier grab it or (best case for a Delta pax) some sort of Gulfstream'esk company coming in with old regional equipment doing the job for 2006-08 prices.

You seem to not understand what passengers want, or what management seems to want now. Not many people like those 50 seaters, especially management. The 717s were a great deal, and they will take back routes that mainline should have had all along. Other managements might not have cared, but the current one does, and they are handling your own situation, so I would pay attention, even in your own bubble. Good luck.

Management, and RA the pioneer of the virtual airline, have consistently wanted as much flying as possible pushed down to the regional level.

Also, I wouldn't pay attention to want passengers want, only what they pay for. In a similar vein, I would ignore what CEO's say, only what they do.

 

[Dan Roman]

XJHawk,

I don't want you to make low wages, I want you to get on with mainline if you want and enjoy upward progression and variety of fleets and destinations, all with higher wages. You have been down a tough road, but hopefully you will get to where you want to be as soon as possible. I think all 3 legacies will be hiring tons in the next few years, and I recall you have some PIC, which is good. Keep networking and eventually you will get to where you want to be.



Bye Bye---General Lee

XJHawk. This really says it all and it's not said often enough for all the pilots job hunting on this board. In the next few years the legacies will need a lot of pilots. After all the years of not hiring a lot of pilots will reach retirement age and with age 65, probably an even higher percentage will go out early in the 60 to 65 range than did those in the 55 to 60 range under the old rule.

 

[General Lee]

Factually incorrect, we got our CRJ-900's from NWA, and the flow and backflow that came with it as an agreement with the pilots and NWA for increasing the number of 76seaters at the regional level outside their scope allowance.

That has yet to be seen. Historically that hasn't been the case, historically they just drop flying into an (i.e.) Albany GA and let another carrier grab it or (best case for a Delta pax) some sort of Gulfstream'esk company coming in with old regional equipment doing the job for 2006-08 prices.

Management, and RA the pioneer of the virtual airline, have consistently wanted as much flying as possible pushed down to the regional level.

Also, I wouldn't pay attention to want passengers want, only what they pay for. In a similar vein, I would ignore what CEO's say, only what they do.

Factually incorrect? Wow, you got me on a technicality. NWA became DL. You probably understood what I meant. There was a flow agreement with Mesaba and incredibly some of your pilots actually turned it down. That is a mistake they think about now most likely.

You're right about DL deciding to drop certain cities in favor of a "gulfstream-esque" Saab 340 dropping in there. But, that was the city pair that RA mentioned in the interview, and there will be 125 50 seaters left. They will likely go to smaller cities that can produce enough revenue to pay for the gas and a bit more. Obviously not a lot of smaller cities can do that today with a 50 seat gas guzzler.

As far as the virtual airline goes, code shares, joint ventures, and alliances have increased that. But, the contract states certain minimums for mainline fleet numbers and DCI fleet numbers. WIth the addition of 88 717s and 14 Md90s, along with 739s replacing some 757s/A320s/763s, it looks like the domestic arena is not going virtual. The INTL fleets are also all getting remods for AVOD and new lie flat seats, so they don't seem to be going away. Those alliances also help gain pax in the countries that the legacies cannot fly WITHIN, like intra China. That fills the legacy widebodies at the permitted cities, like Beijing and Shanghai, and they go out full. As far as the Regionals go, it now seems like mainline is ready to take a lot of the flying back, with 717s. Maybe they can control the product better, and of course spread the costs out more with a larger plane. It helps they got a smokin good deal, too, with the leases and refurb from SWA.

Umm, pax want lie flat seats, video on demand, etc. If you don't add those things, you can lose high valued customers. Looks like DL is adding that on all INTL fleets. That's good.



Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[jynxyjericho]

Factually incorrect? Wow, you got me on a technicality. NWA became DL. You probably understood what I meant.

No, it was clear you weren't educated on how we got the -900's, and in my experience in threads with you there's a long history of you being completely oblivious with the details of the regionals. If I'd guessed what you meant I would have asked to clarify but it's clear to any reader you meant something completely different than what was factually correct. You seem to imply if one were to simply shift DL out and put in it's place NWA that you would have been correct. What you typed- "Your company and others initially got your Surge 9s thanks to DL's BK problems" is incorrect. Ours were replacements for the Avro's in the contract and I thought it was agreed by all in the industry that NWA held onto their scope (and pension) tighter than Delta did during the BK. In exchange for more 76seaters, a company called compass was formed which had flowdown protection for mainline jobs. Mesaba was very lucky to get some flowup privileges with some flowdown.
One could argue NWA made the wrong move from a contract standpoint. I was told that Delta's contract was worth (total dollars per pilot) more than NWA, but NWA did hold on very tight to that scope (and pension). It appears to me we are talking about two very different things. Perhaps other posters will jump in with more details.

There was a flow agreement with Mesaba and incredibly some of your pilots actually turned it down. That is a mistake they think about now most likely.

Firstly what does this have to do with anything? You've only had this explained to you 100 times over by 50 different posters and you're still misinformed? Maybe the more important question is, why are you so arrogant you can criticize everyone's decisions, but for now I would simply leave you with the rhetorical question how short do you think our memories are?

Secondly, some of those guys you are calling a mistaken are retiring this year or next (if not already) and would have never made up the lost income by flowing to NWA. Even if we had shut down on Jan 16th, and they lost out on a years income they couldn't make up the difference. Seriously man, we've got guys born in the late 40's here.

Thirdly, I can attest there are a couple guys who said no to the flow who would like a redo on the condition they know then what they know now. It's an elementary and juvenile point, which I'm not saying you're above, but if that is your point you should make that clear. Anyone with any brains could see their position and the paycut NWA had at the time and sympathize if not agree with their reasoning (with information available on hand). If you are lost on this matter you can always crack open an excel sheet and do it yourself, takes no time at all. You might have a time to find the old NWA contract rates and the old Mesaba concessionary rates (even I don't have those anymore) Realistically though, if they are that young they'll have plenty of time to get on somewhere with an interview so it might be a slight speed bump but what career doesn't have them?

You're right about DL deciding to drop certain cities in favor of a "gulfstream-esque" Saab 340 dropping in there. But, that was the city pair that RA mentioned in the interview, and there will be 125 50 seaters left. They will likely go to smaller cities that can produce enough revenue to pay for the gas and a bit more. Obviously not a lot of smaller cities can do that today with a 50 seat gas guzzler.

As far as the virtual airline goes, code shares, joint ventures, and alliances have increased that. But, the contract states certain minimums for mainline fleet numbers and DCI fleet numbers. WIth the addition of 88 717s and 14 Md90s, along with 739s replacing some 757s/A320s/763s, it looks like the domestic arena is not going virtual. The INTL fleets are also all getting remods for AVOD and new lie flat seats, so they don't seem to be going away. Those alliances also help gain pax in the countries that the legacies cannot fly WITHIN, like intra China. That fills the legacy widebodies at the permitted cities, like Beijing and Shanghai, and they go out full. As far as the Regionals go, it now seems like mainline is ready to take a lot of the flying back, with 717s. Maybe they can control the product better, and of course spread the costs out more with a larger plane. It helps they got a smokin good deal, too, with the leases and refurb from SWA.

Umm, pax want lie flat seats, video on demand, etc. If you don't add those things, you can lose high valued customers. Looks like DL is adding that on all INTL fleets. That's good.

You said a lot to make two points. Anyway to reply to:

They will likely go to smaller cities that can produce enough revenue to pay for the gas and a bit more.

What you said was the 900 would take those small city pairs, now you are saying the 50 seaters will (and they already do). You keep using "they" "it" and other general terms and it is confusing to the reader. You may be making valid points here somewhere, but at this point I'm lost. You are either changing your position or by "they" you mean the -900's not the 50seaters which the "they" is pointing to in that sentence. Truthfully I'm not sure if I'm even grammatically readable anymore. This would be a more useful conversation to everyone if you would simply go point by point.

Assuming you meant the -900's, I think that's naive and incorrect but we'll see. I imagine it will continue doing hub to hub and hub to the SEA's and SFO's and PHX's of the US long into the future. Time will tell.

Assuming you mean the 50seaters will continue to serve small markets because their gas usage sucks and there will only be 125, I don't think anyone is disagreeing here. We were all saying that Delta will push for more 76seaters at the regional level, and that they will succeed. You are saying (later quoted) Delta is bringing on too many mainline jets (717's 737's and the like) for the 76seaters to capture the domestic share, although you admit some are simply replacements, I'd reply that only time will tell on those moves.

it looks like the domestic arena is not going virtual.

It is for right this minute, however the additional 76seaters many see as troubling sign for the future (illustrated above). I think most of us would hope you are correct, however, BK will occur and we all know what the "scope crowbar" has done in the past. It would appear you are only looking 5-7 years into the future, and no more. Would you say that is correct? To me it seems like you're saying "the days of BK are over boys, drink up".

 

[General Lee]

And you think I say a lot to make a point, sheesh!

There is a limit to the number of 50 seaters allowed, which will be 125. That's it, from well over 300 now. Those 125 will still hit smaller cities, that can produce enough to pay for it. The other 200 plus that are leaving will be covered by 70 and 76 seaters. That's fairly easy to understand.

You are right, I didn't know your agreement with NWA about the CR9s, but this BK has changed that. NWA's scope and pensions were tighter in BK, and DL had better pay and work rules. The combination of those resulted in the new DL after the merge, but agreements between the new DL and the feeders were subject to change. Some of that was good, and some bad for parties involved.

My continual bring up of the issue of certain pilots turning down the previous flow up opportunities is more of one out of continual disbelief. I can understand if an age 64 pilot turned it down, but I know 2 people very well that did, and I told them they were crazy. Water under the bridge I guess, but still interesting none the less.

As far what could be the future in store for all of us, two major changes have occurred since the BKs. First, new ancillary fees have been "accepted" by most passengers, and that has helped the legacies return to profitability, limiting the possibility of scope changes due to possible BKs. It hurts any possibility of scope changes forced by the courts. Next is consolidation. Fewer large competitors helps the rest of the legacies succeed. Stronger legacies means fewer chances for scope change, and that will likely keep the top 3 profitable for the foreseeable future, sans another 9-11 type attack. So, BK is always possible, but thanks to those two examples, less likely. That means unilateral scope changes are too. Then add new Regional hiring rules and rest/fatigue rules that make the Regionals less efficient (no more CDOs for example), and that side of the industry will be significantly changed in the future.



Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[xjhawk]

This will be my shortest post-but I think its funny the 3-4 of us who are the most long winded are all commenting on this...fun and a good time killer