Delta parking 10 75s. 717 delivery "fluid"

[sleepy]

As a frequent DAL customer I will ask why don't you park those POS MD88's and keep the 757's flying? Seems like a 757 has more flexability on what it can do, can't really burn much more fuel than an old MD88 and is way more comfortable for passengers.

 

[General Lee]

As a frequent DAL customer I will ask why don't you park those POS MD88's and keep the 757's flying? Seems like a 757 has more flexability on what it can do, can't really burn much more fuel than an old MD88 and is way more comfortable for passengers.

The name of the game right now is debt reduction. So, used planes are coming, along with 100 new 739ERs. The older 757s, some A320s, and a few domestic 767-300s will be retired due to high cycles. Over the next 3 years DL will receive 88 refurbished 717s that will cover current 76 seater routes. 14 refurbished MD90s will also show up this year. Also, all the widebodies are receiving new interiors, personal AVOD in each seat, and new lie flat seats in business or first class. The MD88 fleet will be getting new all glass cockpits, too, and probably new interiors. Why get "used" MD90s? I have heard they are about $8-9 million each total, including the engines, and they do almost the same mission as the 737-800, cheaper. DL is also hiring 225 new Flight Attendants this fall, so new employees will also start showing up. (Hopefully followed by new pilots some day soon)



Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[HowardBorden]

The name of the game right now is debt reduction.

The name of the game SHOULD be not acquiring unsustainable debt loads in the first place.

 

[KarmaPolice]

After reading through the comments, I'm struck by how pilots can't seem to connect their viewpoints with the further degradation of our profession.

Everybody decries the "race to the bottom" the aviation career has become, yet nobody seems willing to see that they are behind the wheel of the race car.

This is not chest thumping. I'm not advocating a return to the militant days of Union Vs Management, and third pilots flying on 737s. But are we not capable of seeing that we are party to our jobs getting further outsourced to JV partners, DCI carriers, and lower paying equipment? Looking at it now, was a 4.8.3.3% raise really worth it when the company has announced billions of dollars in stock price pumping programs?

Management has one major strategy to play against us, and that is our own selfishness/shortsightedness. As a group, we seem unable to see beyond what is immediately in front of us. We were sold this TA using the phrase "time value of money". (hurry up, get it in the bank!) Meanwhile it's one step forward, two steps back for the profession at large.

Those of us who do, have jobs at a legacy mainline because someone who came before us was willing to steward over the profession both for themselves and for the future generations. The two go hand in hand. That in the long run, we benefit most when we choose what is best for all is a lost fact on the "me" generation.

I'm ashamed at my fellow pilots who make excuses for this TA because they like the pay raises in it, while they ignore the lack of meaningful top end scope protection, accept the sham argument that it is why the 50 seaters are getting parked, accept an increase in the number of 76 seat RJ's, take a profit sharing reduction, accept an increased reserve utilization, and institute a sick leave verification program, etc etc.

What are the chances we will see a reversal of fortunes, versus a continued decay in the number of the best paying top jobs? Not likely considering the lack of concern the majority has for the state of the profession, and the amount of emphasis we place on our own piece of the pie.

 

[General Lee]

The name of the game SHOULD be not acquiring unsustainable debt loads in the first place.

Wow, thanks HOWIE. How about certain airlines advertising "No bag fees", yet their subsidiary still does? What about that HOWIE?


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[General Lee]

After reading through the comments, I'm struck by how pilots can't seem to connect their viewpoints with the further degradation of our profession.

Everybody decries the "race to the bottom" the aviation career has become, yet nobody seems willing to see that they are behind the wheel of the race car.

This is not chest thumping. I'm not advocating a return to the militant days of Union Vs Management, and third pilots flying on 737s. But are we not capable of seeing that we are party to our jobs getting further outsourced to JV partners, DCI carriers, and lower paying equipment? Looking at it now, was a 4.8.3.3% raise really worth it when the company has announced billions of dollars in stock price pumping programs?

Management has one major strategy to play against us, and that is our own selfishness/shortsightedness. As a group, we seem unable to see beyond what is immediately in front of us. We were sold this TA using the phrase "time value of money". (hurry up, get it in the bank!) Meanwhile it's one step forward, two steps back for the profession at large.

Those of us who do, have jobs at a legacy mainline because someone who came before us was willing to steward over the profession both for themselves and for the future generations. The two go hand in hand. That in the long run, we benefit most when we choose what is best for all is a lost fact on the "me" generation.

I'm ashamed at my fellow pilots who make excuses for this TA because they like the pay raises in it, while they ignore the lack of meaningful top end scope protection, accept the sham argument that it is why the 50 seaters are getting parked, accept an increase in the number of 76 seat RJ's, take a profit sharing reduction, accept an increased reserve utilization, and institute a sick leave verification program, etc etc.

What are the chances we will see a reversal of fortunes, versus a continued decay in the number of the best paying top jobs? Not likely considering the lack of concern the majority has for the state of the profession, and the amount of emphasis we place on our own piece of the pie.

Uhhhhh, ashamed? Really? Because they see something a lot different than you do? I don't believe in everything Dalpa or ALPA does, but plenty in the contract actually makes sense. A 3 year contract that gives almost a 20% raise is GOOD. Top end scope is important, but if there is a deadline set to see if there is compliance, you have to wait for the deadline. If it isn't then, you have a period to fix it. DL hasn't hit that deadline yet, it's next May. I wish there was a compliance date sooner also, but that was agreed upon.

The 50 seat RJ deal is very easy to understand. If you dump 215 50 seaters, somebody has to fly those routes, and many of those routes can't sustain a mainline sized plane, not even a 717. Throw 70 and 76 seaters on those routes, and maybe they will become profitable where a 50 seater could not. Then, what you seem to forget, is that 717s, 88 of them, will now fly the current 76 seat routes, that were given away long ago. It's called recapturing routes. Those 50 seaters had to go (many had leases through 2015), and the sooner that the do, the sooner 70/76 seaters will COVER those routes, allowing mainline 717s to swoop in and regain routes.

A profit sharing reductions. What happens if pre-tax profits hit $2.5 billion? They might this year, oil is a lot less than expected. Last Summer gas prices were sky high. Now, DL has a refinery and is getting rid of the middle man, plus oil prices are less anyway. If the pre-tax profit is $2.5 billion, then profit sharing INCREASES from 15% to 20%, not decreases. With DL's largest expense (gas) being a lot cheaper than last year, and planes just as full along with the fees, it may happen.

Sick leave verification. Hmmm. Well, if you call in sick 3 times in a month or two, you may have someone calling to see why. What about once a quarter? You get 100 free hours without verification. If you are actually sick, get a note, and that sick call DOESN'T COUNT towards the 100 free hours. That is actually pretty good.


So, a lot of what you are saying may be seen another way. I suggest you call ALPA or talk to people who might be able to answer your questions.



Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[HowardBorden]

Wow, thanks HOWIE. How about certain airlines advertising "No bag fees", yet their subsidiary still does? What about that HOWIE?

As I have pointed out to you before, Southwest follows common industry practices when dealing with code shares. I can only assume that when Delta owned Comair as a wholly owned subsidiary there were certain differences in operating procedures, including baggage handling. SWA has stated that baggage fees will perish with the AirTran brand, however baggage fees are an important revenue generating tool in the AirTran model. As AirTran aircraft transition to the Southwest model baggage fees disappear.

In a taste of things to come, some AirTran flights are now losing their bag fees.

In outlining the connecting of the two airlines' networks, Southwest explained how it is making an exception to the standard way that code shares work. Southwest states:"As is standard with industry "code share" arrangements, the Marketing Carrier's rules and policies apply to reservations and ticketing. The Operating Carrier's procedures apply to boarding, seating, and the onboard experience."
"Southwest is making one exception: any itinerary with a Southwest segment or that is purchased through a Southwest point-of-sale channel will not have bag fees for the first or second checked bag (weight and size restrictions apply)."
http://skift.com/2013/02/15/airtran-eliminating-bag-fees-when-booked-with-southwest-flights/

 

[General Lee]

As I have pointed out to you before, Southwest follows common industry practices when dealing with code shares. I can only assume that when Delta owned Comair as a wholly owned subsidiary there were certain differences in operating procedures, including baggage handling. SWA has stated that baggage fees will perish with the AirTran brand, however baggage fees are an important revenue generating tool in the AirTran model. As AirTran aircraft transition to the Southwest model baggage fees disappear.

In a taste of things to come, some AirTran flights are now losing their bag fees.

In outlining the connecting of the two airlines' networks, Southwest explained how it is making an exception to the standard way that code shares work. Southwest states:"As is standard with industry "code share" arrangements, the Marketing Carrier's rules and policies apply to reservations and ticketing. The Operating Carrier's procedures apply to boarding, seating, and the onboard experience."
"Southwest is making one exception: any itinerary with a Southwest segment or that is purchased through a Southwest point-of-sale channel will not have bag fees for the first or second checked bag (weight and size restrictions apply)."
http://skift.com/2013/02/15/airtran-eliminating-bag-fees-when-booked-with-southwest-flights/

Oh Howie......really? Trying to compare Comair and DL to you two? I can assure you, Comair did, and every DCI carrier does follow whatever DL tells them to do. You know that! Your planes say "bags fly free here" with an arrow, but not at your wholly owned subsidiary. A bit fishy? Uhhhh, yeah..... And you know it HOWIE..... Good try genius! So, AirTran keeps all their bag profits? They do? Riiiiiiiiiight. It funds their operation? Who pulls the strings? You know the answer....


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[HowardBorden]

Your planes say "bags fly free here" with an arrow, but not at your wholly owned subsidiary. It funds their operation? You know the answer....

Yes, I do know the answer. One model is unsustainable without baggage fees. That portion of the Southwest family is currently suspending bag fees on flights within the system that include a portion on Southwest. The other has never charged baggage fees and is in its 42nd year of profitability without the bankruptcy resets that are so prevalent in this industry. As airframes are transitioned they join the side that has never shown an unprofitable year in the history of the airline. I guess these facts are inconvenient and hard to understand viewing the current airline you claim to be associated with.

 

[General Lee]

Yes, I do know the answer. One model is unsustainable without baggage fees. That portion of the Southwest family is currently suspending bag fees on flights within the system that include a portion on Southwest. The other has never charged baggage fees and is in its 42nd year of profitability without the bankruptcy resets that are so prevalent in this industry. As airframes are transitioned they join the side that has never shown an unprofitable year in the history of the airline. I guess these facts are inconvenient and hard to understand viewing the current airline you claim to be associated with.

Just remember Howie, the People's Court SWA commercial and the fat Capt saying "we would NEVER do that...." Riiiight.


Bye Bye---General Lee