Delta TA on SCOPE

[waveflyer]

General-
Usair mainline flies the e190 even though republic flies a lot more e190's/175's &170's and can no doubt do it more "efficiently"

I'm trying to figure out why you can't add another aircraft in your fleet-
You fly a number of different aircraft- why would you think it would work any different than any other type??

 

[General Lee]

General-
Usair mainline flies the e190 even though republic flies a lot more e190's/175's &170's and can no doubt do it more "efficiently"

I'm trying to figure out why you can't add another aircraft in your fleet-
You fly a number of different aircraft- why would you think it would work any different than any other type??

The E190 at USAir is a mainline plane. Frontier uses E190s. I don't see any USAir Express (via Republic) E190s, or United Express E190s. You are getting confused. Delta does not codeshare with Frontier, and they don't use any E190s with a DL codeshare on it. But, they use smaller, permitted planes with Delta, USAir, and United. How is Frontier doing Btw? They have been up for sale for awhile now.

When you add a 76 seater to a fleet initially, you probably could start up your own training program, for your pilots, FAs, and mechanics. You can start from scratch, and try to keep the costs low. DL already uses 76 seaters. We know the costs, because Delta pays the regionals for their feed. In the last few years, the Regionals have gotten slammed by the legacies, who demand lower costs everytime a contract comes due. It used to be the Regionals were in command, flying for rates that gave automatic profits, and the legacies couldn't really do anything about it because half of their feed would be gone overnight. Now, there is more whipsawing, bringing costs down. Look at the BKs, and even the giant SKW has been posting losses. (although they are sitting on some cash they saved when they were overcharging the legacy partners) Colgan can't even hold on to the bigger Dash 8s because United wanted them for less. COLGAN couldn't do it. That should say something.

So, if Delta were to do it inhouse, could they do it for the same price, or for less? What if Delta pilots were the only ones doing it, and then had Comair FAs and PNCL mechanics? Can you see how confusing that would be? I would rather have over 70 more 76 seaters, keep 102 70 seaters doing 50 seat routes to try to make a profit on those, and then dump 150 50 seaters that do nobody any good. They are a waste. Then, add at least 88 717s, and fly them on current 76 seat routes. Tie all that in with a ratio that guarantees mainline will get more of the flying, and allows for 76 seaters to be parked if mainline planes are parked, and that is a good deal. We gain on DCI, we park 150 RJs and have a total of 80 fewer RJs than today, and the rest of the scope (INTL and CS) is better, plus a 19% raise in only 3 years, plus other work rule improvements, and I think the deal is pretty good. I will be looking forward to that roadshow to confirm a lot of this.



Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[fam62c]

We have more leverage than you think. Management is faced with lots of bad leases on worthless 50 seaters. They also know we will get pay parity with SWA in any mediation. They want this contract done early so they can continue with their strategic plans. I'm not saying we could get all flying back in house, but giving them 70 76ers is quite the gift!

Do you know what mediation is? I think you need to brush up on the RLA process. Nobody is going to "give" you "at least" parity with SW, mediators don't have anything to do do with what's in a contract, they just steer the process. Increasingly their job is to make sure that negotiations are endless unless the unions accept the company position. Don't think if you overplay your hand here you will automatically get more. Each day fuel prices drop your leverage decreases as the 50-seaters become less of a problem. There is an amount the company is willing to pay to solve a problem but that amount has a limit.

 

[waveflyer]

General, I'm not confused- the 170/175/190 are ALL the same type and same training-
Republic flies all 3 -( not sure about your wording, but you know that Republic performs the 190 flying at frontier, right?) -Including flying the 170&175 for usair.

Delta is the strongest legacy that participated in such crazy outsourcing-

Are you saying that LCC can set up and operate E190's as mainline a/c while outsourcing 170&175's, but delta couldn't help move the scope bar by flying -900's even though it's regionals fly the -200's and -700's????

Please answer that last question

Then understand the reason your management won't do that is bc they know they have a weak dick pilot group who will accept more -900's going to dci.

Delta has made it a gray area on purpose-

To me- accepting those grays is what got you to such a sellout position- DALPA The undisputed leader on outsourcing.

Call this what it is and keep it simple- ---> More Large Jet airliners being flown by non delta pilot's for delta airlines.

NO AMOUNT OF MUDDYING THE WATERS WILL CHANGE THAT MORE 86,000lb, 320KIAS/.82M, FL410 JET AIRLINERS - WILL BE OUTSOURCED BY DELTA IF YOU SIGN THIS TA.

THIS IS A SERIOUS OPPORTUNITY IN THE ECONOMY TO GET OUTSOURCING BACK TO REASONABLE LEVELS- DALPA IS SIMPLY NOT STRONG ENOUGH ON THIS ISSUE-

YOU JUST DON'T GET IT. AFTER MANY YEARS NOW GENERAL OF YOU TELLING ME THAT YOU'RE DIFFERENT NOW- you still have tiny little penis's and lack the vision to see what this does-

More large airplanes is simply unacceptable.

 

[GogglesPisano]

Again, this TA reduces the potential number of 76-seaters. You can make all the arguments you'd like. But don't come up with your own facts. That's very ... Republican.

 

[General Lee]

General, I'm not confused- the 170/175/190 are ALL the same type and same training-
Republic flies all 3 -( not sure about your wording, but you know that Republic performs the 190 flying at frontier, right?) -Including flying the 170&175 for usair.

Delta is the strongest legacy that participated in such crazy outsourcing-

Are you saying that LCC can set up and operate E190's as mainline a/c while outsourcing 170&175's, but delta couldn't help move the scope bar by flying -900's even though it's regionals fly the -200's and -700's????

Please answer that last question

Then understand the reason your management won't do that is bc they know they have a weak dick pilot group who will accept more -900's going to dci.

Delta has made it a gray area on purpose-

To me- accepting those grays is what got you to such a sellout position- DALPA The undisputed leader on outsourcing.

Call this what it is and keep it simple- ---> More Large Jet airliners being flown by non delta pilot's for delta airlines.

NO AMOUNT OF MUDDYING THE WATERS WILL CHANGE THAT MORE 86,000lb, 320KIAS/.82M, FL410 JET AIRLINERS - WILL BE OUTSOURCED BY DELTA IF YOU SIGN THIS TA.

THIS IS A SERIOUS OPPORTUNITY IN THE ECONOMY TO GET OUTSOURCING BACK TO REASONABLE LEVELS- DALPA IS SIMPLY NOT STRONG ENOUGH ON THIS ISSUE-

YOU JUST DON'T GET IT. AFTER MANY YEARS NOW GENERAL OF YOU TELLING ME THAT YOU'RE DIFFERENT NOW- you still have tiny little penis's and lack the vision to see what this does-

More large airplanes is simply unacceptable.

Wave,

I know they are all the same type rating, but they only fly E190s on the Frontier side. Not for USAir, UAL, or DL. Scope clauses don't allow that. But, for their subsidiary Frontier, yes, yes they do. But, they don't fly any Frontier code shares with Delta or anyone else. Frontier is frontier.

I see where you are going with LCC flying E190s, and Republic flying E170/75s for USAir. It's essentially the same flying, except Republic does NOT fly E190s for USAir, and the E190s at USAir make more money for USAir than the E170/75s. IF you tried to equate the same thing with us, you could say we would fly the E190 and Shuttle America or Compass fly the E175s, or we fly the CRJ1000, and SKW or PNCL fly the CR7/9. None of those things are going to happen. No such orders. The more seats they have, the lower the CASM. The deal is the 50 seaters are junk and have a high CASM. The 70 seaters are marginally better, and they might be able to swing a profit on current 50 seat routes that do not. The 76 seaters have a few more first class seats, and they are even better than the 70 seaters on certain routes, thin routes that may need to be tested before you fly a 717 on it. If significant demand is there, then it is time to throw a 717 or A319 on it, and a mainline route is born. Some cities are just smaller, and probably can't sustain a 717 or larger. You guys are pulling out of 17 cities all together as you give us your 717s.

When you try to ask if we could do the same, fly 76 seaters instead of DCI, all we have to do is look at the current financials of what the current 76 seaters at DCI cost. We have it right there. LCC has E190s because LCC has a scope clause, so they aren't allowed to fly FOR USAIR by Republic. We look at how cheap it is to fly those CR9s, and we try to see if we can match or beat that low cost. If we cost twice what DCI costs for planes THEY ALREADY OPERATE, then I don't think that would float with anyone. Sure, they could fly 757s for $40 an hour, but we have a scope clause currently that forbids that. So, looking at CR9s or E175s, can we pay pilots, FAs, mechanics, rampers, etc the same as it costs DCI to do it? Probably not.

So, instead of trying to grab 76 seaters and reinvent the wheel, why can't we just get 717s and bigger, and keep a nice ratio that allows us to grab back a higher percentage of overall domestic flights, and also dump 150 50 seaters that we know don't help us. We give 70 76 seaters, but we tie that to our own growth, and if our growth stops, so does DCI growth. AMAZING. We all win---mainline grows, DCI 50 seaters go away, Delta makes a bit more money on money losing routes by putting larger RJs on those same routes that probably are a bit too small for a 717. Your own company again is dumping 17 cities after you give us the 717s. Why didn't GK just say "Hey, Tunica, we'll be baaaaack...." Maybe because even Tunica couldn't support a 737. You should grab some 50 seat RJs to do it. I know where you can buy some.....(cheap)


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[Jar Jar]

So, do you want to keep the money losing 50 seaters around longer?

...

Those 102 70 seat RJs out there will probably fill in for the 50 seaters on their routes that can't make money. That means they have a chance of making money for Detla, rather than losing it.

RJs making money only keeps them around longer.

 

[redflyer65]

Yep. And Delta will move the cheese again next time. It will be the same thing....the 76 seat won't be profitable so they will need to trade them in for 100 seaters. The Delta pilots will bite off on it again and again and again.

 

[SWA Bubba]

...

YOU JUST DON'T GET IT. AFTER MANY YEARS NOW GENERAL OF YOU TELLING ME THAT YOU'RE DIFFERENT NOW- you still have tiny little penis's and lack the vision to see what this does-

More large airplanes is simply unacceptable.

Wow.... straight for the "tiny penis" remark. That's kinda' low, Wave. The General's doctor says that the technical name is "micro penis." It's not his fault. :blush:

Bubba

 

[xjhawk]

Hey General, just so you can get your facts straight about Colgan's (Pinnacle) Q fleet. The offer they gave United was lower to operate than the winning bid that is now going to operate the Q's. Yes, I have had a couple long talks with one of the union negotiators and he said it was a three part deal. In order for Pinnacle to not go into bankruptcy they needed three things. United to increase the service agreement to a profitable point, Delta to do the same thing for the ATL CRJ 900's, and the pilots would have to give 5%. United agreed but Delta said no and we all know that the pilots did not get a chance to vote on it. Forcing Pinnacle into bankruptcy. There has also been a lot of talk about Delta not making payments to Pinnacle to cover costs associated with the Merger when they bought Mesaba. The cost at which Colgan was to provide the Q service was lower than the other bids. It was Delta who forced the issue. Eliminating both the United and US Air flying at Pinnacle. Giving Delta the control during Pinnacles bankruptcy. Sound familiar? SOunds like the 05 Bankruptcy where NWA forced Mesaba into bankruptcy and what was the outcome of that? I think the TA that was just penned has a lot to do with Delta being in the position it is in for Pinnacles situation. Now they can control the loss of 50 seaters at Pinnacle or anything else they want to do.

 

[captain caveman]

So you won't be happy until EVERY regional pilot is out of work? I can't wait until my foreclosure. That will be fun! And lets get off our high and mighty horses and stop pretending you are doing us a favor. We all know that there are not enough spots for everyone at Delta. You want all the 50 seaters eliminated, and no additional flying to off set that. Seems you have a job and you aren't going to be happy until we all don't have one! Mindless hatred.

Cry me a river. Update your logbook and start applying. Majors will be hiring bigtime. This is better for pilots in general including you.

 

[captain caveman]

General, Thanks for taking the time to disect the TA and provide your insight. I tend to agree with you that 76 seaters can't be as efficiently flown at mainline. But, let's think outside the box, for a second. If we trade 50s for bigger Bombardiers to be flown at mainline, they won't be 76 seaters at all. We could see CRJ1000s with 90 seats and a first class config or even some C-series. So in a way we are giving management some great flexibility.

Karma, I agree with you, we need to send it back.

 

[anewunion]

A ton of people I talk with will vote YES, including me. I'm not going to gamble for the next few year for just maybe 5% more. As far as scope goes, I think that a cap on how many DCI is the key. I really think that DAL management has figured a thing or two from SWA, and Jetblue.

Do your own flying...

 

[General Lee]

General, Thanks for taking the time to disect the TA and provide your insight. I tend to agree with you that 76 seaters can't be as efficiently flown at mainline. But, let's think outside the box, for a second. If we trade 50s for bigger Bombardiers to be flown at mainline, they won't be 76 seaters at all. We could see CRJ1000s with 90 seats and a first class config or even some C-series. So in a way we are giving management some great flexibility.

Karma, I agree with you, we need to send it back.

Do you know how much a CR9 or a CRJ1000 costs new? Four times what a used 717 costs. RA wants to bring the debt down to $10 billion by the end of next year so Delta can save $500 million per year in interest on the debt. That is why we are buying MD90s for $8 million each including the engines, and used 717s from Southwest. The only big order we have made so far lately was for the 100 737-900ERs, and I bet Boeing gave a great deal thanks to the 787 delays. When it comes down to it, mainline flying CR9s or CRJ1000s is way too expensive. We can't create a mainline RJ operation that costs less than the current whipsaw over at the regionals. Instead, we are using ratios that will ensure Mainline gaining ground over something that was impossible 5 years ago. 150 50 seat RJs have to go away within a couple years. That plus a 19% wage increase in 3 years, plus many improvements throughout our terrible BK contract makes me lean a lot towards YES. Read the material from the union, go to a roadshow like I will. Get informed, and remember, going back for more doesn't always work. (ask the Airtran guys) It might work, but it might not, in a big way.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[General Lee]

A ton of people I talk with will vote YES, including me. I'm not going to gamble for the next few year for just maybe 5% more. As far as scope goes, I think that a cap on how many DCI is the key. I really think that DAL management has figured a thing or two from SWA, and Jetblue.

Do your own flying...

I agree. There are some markets that a 717 or A319 just can't fly to, and it honestly would be too expensive to create our own CR9 category. It would be a logistical nightmare. Instead, let's work on getting 88 717s that allow a lot of FOs to move up (even I may consider jumping to Captain---take a look at the rates in a couple years. I would get an $80 raise per hour if I got onto the 737). Throw on a ratio where if mainline shrinks, DCI shrinks, and then you got a darn good deal. We want Delta to be profitable, so in 3 years we can come back and ask for MORE. To do that, we need profits on current RJ routes that are not profitable due to 50 seaters. Throw a 70 seater out there to help cover all of the costs the 50 seater can't handle. Tied growth, pay raise, better scope, improved sick leave, improved work rules, and 3 year contract. Not bad.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[waveflyer]

RJs making money only keeps them around longer.

This^^^
Good general- that line of thinking proves at least 1 pilot who swore up and down on FI that he did get what was wrong with scope - doesn't.
I presume you just said that so I'd stop calling you sellouts??

The idea is this- if delta can't make $$ with an airplane without whipsawing 4 or 5 separate companies against each other to artificially keep labor wages low and violate the ENTIRE CONCEPT OF SENIORITY AND EXPERIENCE BASED PAY- THEN MAYBE THEY OUGHT NOT BE ALLOWED BY YOUR "UNION" (a joke of a union) to FLY THEM AT ALL.

If you need that false market and the thousands of disenfranchised pilots who will never have the leverage to improve their lot by much - then it is DALPA's RESPONSIBILITY TO STAND UP AND NOT HAVE IT.

You guys repeatedly fail in your responsibilities as a union- amazing considering the slippery slope you know scope tends to slide down

 

[PCL_128]

going back for more doesn't always work. (ask the Airtran guys)

Not sure what you mean by that last comment. Our 2007 TA was essentially cost-neutral. The meager pay raises were all offset by other concessions. Our 2010 contract represented an immediate 30% increase to pilot payroll. Rejecting the first TA was the right move.

But I do agree with you in general. Our situation was unique for many reasons. In general, though, sending a TA back in hopes of getting more is usually a losing proposition. Because of the time value of money, you usually lose far more than you gain from further negotiations.

 

[777forever]

This^^^
Good general- that line of thinking proves at least 1 pilot who swore up and down on FI that he did get what was wrong with scope - doesn't.
I presume you just said that so I'd stop calling you sellouts??

The idea is this- if delta can't make $$ with an airplane without whipsawing 4 or 5 separate companies against each other to artificially keep labor wages low and violate the ENTIRE CONCEPT OF SENIORITY AND EXPERIENCE BASED PAY- THEN MAYBE THEY OUGHT NOT BE ALLOWED BY YOUR "UNION" (a joke of a union) to FLY THEM AT ALL.

If you need that false market and the thousands of disenfranchised pilots who will never have the leverage to improve their lot by much - then it is DALPA's RESPONSIBILITY TO STAND UP AND NOT HAVE IT.

You guys repeatedly fail in your responsibilities as a union- amazing considering the slippery slope you know scope tends to slide down

Scope is heading in the right direction with this TA. No question about it. Not a homerun, but a significant still in the right direction

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

 

[727RedTails]

I have only talked to one yes voter during a 4 day trip. I'm sorry the 4833 is paid for by productivity increases (ie less pilots) and a reduction in profit sharing. The 717's minus parking other airplanes and the productivity increases will mean little movement... Even the company negotiators are saying it's cost neutral. How is that a good deal?

Don't worry, RA wants to keep the momentum going and will look for a quick remedy if we vote it down. He thinks we are 3-4 years ahead of the other majors and wants to keep going forward with his plans.

VOTE NO!

 

[trip]

This^^^
Good general- that line of thinking proves at least 1 pilot who swore up and down on FI that he did get what was wrong with scope - doesn't.
I presume you just said that so I'd stop calling you sellouts??

The idea is this- if delta can't make $$ with an airplane without whipsawing 4 or 5 separate companies against each other to artificially keep labor wages low and violate the ENTIRE CONCEPT OF SENIORITY AND EXPERIENCE BASED PAY- THEN MAYBE THEY OUGHT NOT BE ALLOWED BY YOUR "UNION" (a joke of a union) to FLY THEM AT ALL.

If you need that false market and the thousands of disenfranchised pilots who will never have the leverage to improve their lot by much - then it is DALPA's RESPONSIBILITY TO STAND UP AND NOT HAVE IT.

You guys repeatedly fail in your responsibilities as a union- amazing considering the slippery slope you know scope tends to slide down

Somebody gets it!
This would require pain and sacrifice at the mainline level not gains, it will never happen.
With the passing of this TA RJ's at the lowest bidder airline have just been solidified by ALPA and the big players at mainline-again. Be sure to remind the next jagoff that give you crap for flying the RJ.