Delta realignment

[uba757]

What I undestand is that around 165 pilot positions willbe cut by either furlough or personal leave. Uba757

 

[MetroSheriff]

As usual General, you totally missed my point. I wasn't refering to Delta changing, I was referring to ALPA and mainline pilots like you who still hold on to the old "natural progression" BS. That "natural progression" you speak of for us lowly "regional" pilots has been replaced by natural selection of those who survive with jobs and those who don't. I'm not interested in "progessing" according to your pre-destined right of passage - rather I am interested in protecting my job regardless of how it affects you.

Joe

Uh oh, someone is on his rant again.

JB is that you????

 

[Andy Neill]

Incorrect. They are trying to put more pressure on Airtran. Some of the flights they have recently added are in direct competition---like adding Bloomington, IL and Moline, IA.

Call me crazy, but I don't think AirTran cares a bit about Delta coming to Moline, IA....IF, in fact, they can find such a place.

 

[On Your Six]

Call me crazy, but I don't think AirTran cares a bit about Delta coming to Moline, IA....IF, in fact, they can find such a place.

http://forums.flightinfo.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Delta needs to compete with AirTran on these types of routes but with 70-100 seat aircraft. The CRJs can't compete from either an economic or an ergonomic/comfort standpoint (both the CRJ-200 and the 700 are equally uncomfortable although the 700 has better economics). Larger aircraft don't make sense because of the limited demand from these smaller markets. Delta offers more international connections than AirTran for Moline business people (John Deere has a large office there with thousands of people stationed in the area) and a better frequent flier program - so, there are reasons for people from Moline to choose Delta. If Delta had E-170 or E-190 aircraft available it could offer a product as good as the 717 in terms of comfort and cost.

AirTran cannot provide the scope of national (e.g., Daytona Beach or El Paso) or international connections that Delta can provide - so, Delta's costs need to be lower in order to more effectively compete and preserve margins. E-170s and E190s would provide a very competitive product to counter Air Tran's advances.

Let's hope DAL pilots negotiate the right to fly these aircraft at near-Jet Blue wages (hopefully a little higher because Jet Blue's E-190 rates are economic for the airline but still too low for the pilots) after Chap. 11 happens and the restructuring begins...

 

[ATRCA]

Delta needs to compete with AirTran on these types of routes but with 70-100 seat aircraft. The CRJs can't compete from either an economic or an ergonomic/comfort standpoint (both the CRJ-200 and the 700 are equally uncomfortable although the 700 has better economics). Larger aircraft don't make sense because of the limited demand from these smaller markets. Delta offers more international connections than AirTran for Moline business people (John Deere has a large office there with thousands of people stationed in the area) and a better frequent flier program - so, there are reasons for people from Moline to choose Delta. If Delta had E-170 or E-190 aircraft available it could offer a product as good as the 717 in terms of comfort and cost.

AirTran cannot provide the scope of national (e.g., Daytona Beach or El Paso) or international connections that Delta can provide - so, Delta's costs need to be lower in order to more effectively compete and preserve margins. E-170s and E190s would provide a very competitive product to counter Air Tran's advances.

Let's hope DAL pilots negotiate the right to fly these aircraft at near-Jet Blue wages (hopefully a little higher because Jet Blue's E-190 rates are economic for the airline but still too low for the pilots) after Chap. 11 happens and the restructuring begins...

Yes, yes, yes, but....JB's pay retes for the E-190 or not great, but the rate changes depending on how much your willing to work. They are not horrible and the type would be good for Delta mgmnt and pilots in my opinion.

 

[wms]

The problem is DAL can't afford to buy new planes, E170/190 or otherwise. If they are gonna put planes in the 70 seat or 90-110 seat range on line they're gonna have to pay someone else to do it. DALPA surely won't let another carrier fly 90-110 seaters, so that leaves contract carriers to fly the E170s, and leaves a gap in the 100 seat markets. One of the results of DALPA's giving in on scope IMHO. I'd rather see growth at ML than contract carriers, one of which I am now, thank you very much! So much for WOs doing 50% of DAL departures (I wonder DALPA/ALPA is on this).

DAL has gotten into more of a position of being a seat broker than an airline.

 

[79%N1]

The 70-100 seat jets will be fought out by the contract carriers, probably a combination of CHQ/REP and Skywest/ASA after DAL declares bankrupcy and their scope gets tossed out (See USAIRWAYS). Maybe even for E190 products. DAL cannot afford to buy these airplanes, and DALPA WILL NOT be competitive for what these other companies can fly for. Remember, overall costs are the factor, not just crew pay. Managers, dispatchers, cleaners, rampers and mechanics all cost more at DAL than CHQ or SKW! DAL needs to, and probably wants to compete with the likes of Airtran out of ATL and Jet Blue out of NY and FLA, but cannot with 50 seat RJ's OR old, expensive MD80's and 737's.

IMHO

 

[General Lee]

The problem is DAL can't afford to buy new planes, E170/190 or otherwise. If they are gonna put planes in the 70 seat or 90-110 seat range on line they're gonna have to pay someone else to do it. DALPA surely won't let another carrier fly 90-110 seaters, so that leaves contract carriers to fly the E170s, and leaves a gap in the 100 seat markets. One of the results of DALPA's giving in on scope IMHO. I'd rather see growth at ML than contract carriers, one of which I am now, thank you very much! So much for WOs doing 50% of DAL departures (I wonder DALPA/ALPA is on this).

DAL has gotten into more of a position of being a seat broker than an airline.

Could Air Canada afford the 35 777s and 20 787's they announced just outside of Canadian Chap 11? They were days from liquidation. The reason the whole deal fell apart was a disagreement between the old CP AIR pilots (who merged with Air Canada) and the Air Canada guys on who would fly what.... Sounds familiar.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[General Lee]

The 70-100 seat jets will be fought out by the contract carriers, probably a combination of CHQ/REP and Skywest/ASA after DAL declares bankrupcy and their scope gets tossed out (See USAIRWAYS). Maybe even for E190 products. DAL cannot afford to buy these airplanes, and DALPA WILL NOT be competitive for what these other companies can fly for. Remember, overall costs are the factor, not just crew pay. Managers, dispatchers, cleaners, rampers and mechanics all cost more at DAL than CHQ or SKW! DAL needs to, and probably wants to compete with the likes of Airtran out of ATL and Jet Blue out of NY and FLA, but cannot with 50 seat RJ's OR old, expensive MD80's and 737's.

IMHO

Grinstein said that there would be more 70 seaters with first class probably. Then he stated something about 737-700s flying to many new South American routes. He stated both Boeing and GE want to work with us. And, the expensive MD88s (you said MD80s) have all just gotten new interiors and bathrooms. They are not scheduled to leave anywhere until 2011 or 2012. And, Dalpa will fight for any 100 seaters if they ever do come up. USAir---the AWA side, is currently fighting against those 100 seaters at CHQ, since they know it is ridiculous. Too bad you do not.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[N2264J]

first of all, even if CMR and ASA had scope, do you believe it would be ironclad, or would there be economic or force majuer clauses just like there were in the mainline scope? I think you are fooling yourself to think your scope would have protected you anymore than mainline scope has protected us. Certainly not if BK is declared.

Try as you might to redirect the argument, your hypothetical misses the point. We were prevented by our own union from the opportunity to even attempt to protect ourselves from the serious hole in the mainline scope clause concerning "permitted aircraft." We were locked out. It's had the effect of driving this flying off the property and inducing a horrible whipsaw problem, courtesy of ALPA.