Delta TA on SCOPE

[SIG600]

Rather than restore, this is working from the "new standard" (low bar).

Not even close to what your predecessors negotiated 12 years ago.

 

[Hamfighter]

There is who reason to allow DCI more large planes. I understand that it is a net reduction, but you are still giving away MORE LARGE PLANES.
And, what are we doing with all the money we are "saving" by giving away our flying? We're sure not paying mainline.

 

[Hamfighter]

How about we allow unlimited 76-seat planes...flown by DELTA pilots. Not enough DELTA pilots to fly hundreds of LARGE RJs? Perhaps we could hire hundreds of DCI pilots.

For once, quit diluting and DISOLVING Delta Air Lines.



(I'm going to, stick this in its own thread.)

 

[n757st]

You realize if you buy us ( JetBlue), you get 190ish mainline jets added and now gain a bunch of Rjs in the process... Oh, and no new pilots.

 

[PCL_128]

Don't you have a mainline pay rate for 76 seaters? Why set a rate if you give away the flying? Why can't the replacement aircraft flying be done by mainline pilots?

Because it's not economically feasible. Doing so would place Delta at an extreme competitive disadvantage against the other carriers who can outsource that flying at a much lower cost. Remember, it's not just the pilots. Even if the pilots agreed to do it at regional rates, they still have the FAs, rampers, mechanics, customer service agents, etc. Paying mainline benefits, wages, and work rules to all of those people to handle the 76-seat operation while all of their competitors are outsourcing that same flying for a much lower cost is not a recipe for profitability.

 

[Diesel-9]

More concessions to a concessionary contract. Many of the things missing in this contract were still in the NWA contract AFTER CH-11 and the wizards in Hooterville elected not to take them. "Everything we do and have is better!" Yea, about 25% worth. Another decade lost just trying to get back what we had in the early 90's. The "Moak" mentality, O'Malley and all the "Old Delta Kool-Aide Klub" need to go fast. They're killing us with their loyalty, to Management! DPA is NOW an option!!!!! Competition is good...

 

[BID]

Can you just picture all those 90 seat jets flying around! (configured to 76 seats) wow!

It's no wonder our CEO at United likes this TA.

 

[amcnd]

FYI Currently you have outsourced:

348 50 Seaters
102 65-69 Seaters
153 76 Seaters
Total: 603 Aircraft / 35862 seats

Proposed outsourcing:
125 "70 seaters" (using 67 as an average again = 8750 seats)
223 76 seaters (16948 seats)
Total: 348 Aircraft / 25698 seats

Total seats go down by about 28%. But, when was the last time you saw a 50 seater running DTW-IAH, SLC-LAX, LGA-ORD, JFK-ORD, or MSP-YVR?

I think if you looked at the average miles flown by the 900/175 you'd see that the seat mile reduction is probably much less than 28%.

Your numbers don't have any 50 seaters??? Im sure some will stay around.. Routes like MSP-RST, SLC-SGU. Ect.. Pluss all the "pro-rate" markets... The way i look at it.. There will be more "pro-rate" crj200 flying. And atleast 50-100 will stay around for awhile...

 

[Crash Pad]

Because it's not economically feasible. Doing so would place Delta at an extreme competitive disadvantage against the other carriers who can outsource that flying at a much lower cost. Remember, it's not just the pilots. Even if the pilots agreed to do it at regional rates, they still have the FAs, rampers, mechanics, customer service agents, etc. Paying mainline benefits, wages, and work rules to all of those people to handle the 76-seat operation while all of their competitors are outsourcing that same flying for a much lower cost is not a recipe for profitability.

This dip$$/t sold scope for nothing. Riddle me this smart guy. How does SWA compete with no RJs? Thank god they bought us or we would be selling the 717 to Pinnacle so we could compete.

Your argument is that it is cheaper to put 76 seats in a 90 seater, then pay someone at a profit to fly them.

Which makes more sense than putting 90 seats in a 90 seater and flying it yourself. Maybe Delta is buying leverage on the cheap.

 

[AirMike]

It all sounds good until the next cyclical downturn. Cue Delta bankruptcy and the limit on 76 seaters goes away. Then the majority of Delta's mainline narrowbodys get parked in the desert and the bottom of the seniority list goes to fly at DCI as a first year FO.

Naw, that could never happen..... (cough, UAL, cough). That scope section is a non-starter. If Delta votes yes on that, they will be the catalyst for the destruction of mainline domestic flying.

 

[Crash Pad]

Section 1 Scope:
Delta branded, painted, or ticketed planes or passengers will be flown by Delta pilots.

Look one line and I don't even charge 500 an hour. I'd even take a 5 dollar pay cut for that line

 

[JustaNumber]

Which makes more sense than putting 90 seats in a 90 seater and flying it yourself.

Just a minor correction, but a CRJ900 with single-class configuration (which DAL does not want) typically can seat only 86. (Although I suppose you could try to squeeze 90 seats in if you're flying in China).

 

[Homer Jay]

This TA looks like a POS. PLEASE do not vote this in. I doubt the CAL/UAL MEC would even allow this to get voted on by the line pilots.

 

[Rough67]

History says -->. Pay rates come and go... Profits come and go... Scope/seats/jobs just go. Voting NO.

Card going in (they aren't hearing me "loud and clear").

The 50 seaters are going on their own, and the company will get more mainline aircraft regardless of our vote.

Have a nice day.

 

[wms]

Sorry folks, but if you vote this I see us all heavily regretting it within 5 years ie same farking mistake made with the 50 seaters. The fact that my scumbag CEO sent all UAL pilots a letter TODAY telling us that this DAL TA is the new normal says it all about how management feels. Vote this and we ALL will regret it.

And for god sakes GL don't trust any "negotiators notepad". Bullet points sponsored by ALPA lead to numb nuts at CAL approving Contract '02

Ditto, unfortunately I think it will pass. I'm tired of being the low-cost scape goat so ml mgmt can avoid raising prices.

 

[jtf]

Are there any limits on contracting out 70 seat or greater turboprops? Or any other size? Can they replace the 50 jets with turboprops for the routes that are still better served by smaller airplanes without counting against the the limits already discussed?

 

[General Lee]

You realize if you buy us ( JetBlue), you get 190ish mainline jets added and now gain a bunch of Rjs in the process... Oh, and no new pilots.

The 717s were just announced, and there is a LIMIT to the number of RJs, both 76 seats and 50/70. The total number drastically goes down, which is good. Can Delta do that without the "trade up" to 76 seaters? I don't know, maybe there are iron clad leases on the 50 seaters. I guess you could just park them and still pay for them.....


Remember, I am not very happy about this TA so far, but we are talking about the scope section here. The limits made on INTL scope, and AK scope are a lot better. As far as the RJs go, there is a problem, and it also contains the problem of what to do with those 50 seaters that may or may not go away. Tell me what to do if you can't dump the leases.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[General Lee]

Are there any limits on contracting out 70 seat or greater turboprops? Or any other size? Can they replace the 50 jets with turboprops for the routes that are still better served by smaller airplanes without counting against the the limits already discussed?

I think there is a limit on large turboprops. I'll have to go look again.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[General Lee]

This dip$$/t sold scope for nothing. Riddle me this smart guy. How does SWA compete with no RJs? Thank god they bought us or we would be selling the 717 to Pinnacle so we could compete.

Your argument is that it is cheaper to put 76 seats in a 90 seater, then pay someone at a profit to fly them.

Which makes more sense than putting 90 seats in a 90 seater and flying it yourself. Maybe Delta is buying leverage on the cheap.

A used 717 is a lot cheaper than a new CR9 with 90 seats. Used MD90s are a lot cheaper than a new CR9 with 90 seats. The MD90s, including the engines, are about $8 million total, and DL is actively looking to buy every one of them out there that is flyable. (the 29 Saudi MD90s were sold to Aerosale, and might be parted out. They had a different configuration and cockpit anyway). So, instead of making a 90 seat CR9 that probably wouldn't have a first class, or getting the even more expensive CRJ1000 (some are flying in Europe now), they are getting used planes that are cheaper and can be fixed up to be even more comfortable and flyable for at least 10 more years. 4 or 5 used 717s or MD90s per NEW CRJ1000 or CR9 with 90 seats.



Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[General Lee]

Sorry folks, but if you vote this I see us all heavily regretting it within 5 years ie same farking mistake made with the 50 seaters. The fact that my scumbag CEO sent all UAL pilots a letter TODAY telling us that this DAL TA is the new normal says it all about how management feels. Vote this and we ALL will regret it.

And for god sakes GL don't trust any "negotiators notepad". Bullet points sponsored by ALPA lead to numb nuts at CAL approving Contract '02

I just want to see a summary of what the ALPA guys were thinking. I can try to read the TA, but I would have to hire a lawyer to do that.

Bye Bye---General Lee