More DAL furloughs

[General Lee]

The VP of flt OPs said that their intent was to furlough the full 1400 pilots. An ATL Chief pilot said the original 1700 number was scaled down to 1400 to factor in the retirements scheduled for this year. But, I have one question----if and when we go to Iraq, and many many pilots are called up to fly for the National Guard etc., will there again be a shortage? The Iraq conflict could last for 6 months to 1 year, and Delta has a lot of reservists and Guard guys.

As far as more than 1400 pilots being furloughed, from what the VP of Flt Ops said last fri---(1400) and the ATL Chief Pilot said on
Mon (the same), I don't think the number has changed yet. I hope it doesn't and I hope the economy gets better quick and guys come back to work.


Bye Bye----General Lee

 

[rapidD]

Just some additional salt in the wound for those of us furloughed DAL guys. Looks like the company is positioning for a SECOND force majeure if we go to war with Iraq. The latest bit of kool aid info from the VP for Ops notes that the 1400 is based on current conditions. Don't be surprised if Iraq and increased fuel prices don't give rise to even more.....the hits just keep on coming.

Also, and not trying to throw gas onto a tired thread but the "connection" carriers aren't just flying some of the old mainline routes. I just nonrevved into DCA on a "connection" carrier." Giving up a slot used to be unheard of, now it's just good business.

Anybody need their grass cut?

 

[pb4ufly]

. I didn't say RJ's were evil. Actually, in the business side scheme of things, it makes sense- lower operating costs, more frequent flights, newer airplanes, etc. Passengers like 'em!

Passengers like RJs? Compared to a Saab 340 - yes, compared to an A320 or MD88- no way. Passengers have no choice. For comfort and roominess, anyone would agree.

 

[General Lee]

Hopefully Congress will help with gas costs if we attack Iraq (Sen Oberstar did mention that as a possibility), and People will PROBABLY still fly over the holidays---even if we go after Iraq---and after the first two or three weeks when it appears that we are winning overwhelmingly, people won't be as scared.

It is kinda scary, though.

Bye Bye-----General Lee

 

[Russ]

pb4ufly
I would rather be in a window or aisle on a RJ then in the middle seat of a larger plane. My opinion only, so no character attacks please.

 

[hampton]

mainline/regional routes

I keep hearing about "regionals" taking "mainline" routes. The focus here should be on the customers and customer demand. Perhaps put a cap on the frequency that an RJ can go into a city before the larger planes go in--that would possibly be a reasonable scope limit. It's ignorant beyond words to describe a route as "our" route. They are all "our" customers. The best companies will put the best airplanes on the market and make money the whole time. RJ's serve customers for the most part as well as an md-88. To say a company is flying a mainline route-----how ridiculous. It's better to sell 30 seats on an RJ and make a little money than sell 30 on an MD and bleed money. As an example, Delta frequents some markets w/ large equipment. Atlanta---Birmingham AL. In the way most people think, that's a "regional" market and too short of a flight. What misinformation. If enough people go between the two to justify it, put 75's on it. If it justifies putting 8 150 seat planes on it daily (1200 passengers), do it. When demand drops 5%, put an RJ on it and put the 75 in another short run where 10 Rj's a day go to. Perhaps Montgomery AL just in looking at the flight schedule book. I think it's a reasonable answer. In conclusion, they are all our customers--- Let's try to take their money and profit rather than transport them and lose money. That would be a great start toward returning the Delta pilots to the air, and providing a great future for the subsidiaries, until we can all get along better amongst ourselves.

 

[rapidD]

I think people are misinterpreting the observation. Its not an argument about what the best equipment is for a particular route, its a discussion about people losing their jobs. In essence, Delta is outsourcing its flying for cheaper labor. Makes perfect business since. Why pay me $100 an hour to fly my MD-88 into DCA when you can pay a fraction of that to the guy flying an RJ. This outsourcing is further developed through code shares, such as the DAL proposal with NWA and Continental. Where you stand is where you sit, though. I no longer have a job and no one else in the aviaiton community (with a few exceptions) will interview me because I'm furloughed from a major carrier. I don't begrudge the RJ guy one bit. More power to 'em. They're working and I'm not. What I am saying is that the industry has changed so dramatically in the last year that what was once an highly sought after and bargained for slot into a major eastern hub is now being sourced by what has traditionally been termed a "connection" carrier. The company's verbiage not mine.

In essence, we all lose. There can be no upward mobility with layoffs. I won't get my job back until DAL has shrunken capacity enough to warrant it. The RJ guy who desires to move on to what was once a "major" carrier can't do so until I get my job back. The only guy that's genuinely happy is the guy at a smaller, connection carrier who is happy to stay where he's at. Or, the entry level guy who can now catch on at a regional that otherwise would not have had that opportunity. The flying public is getting what essentially is the same service as before at a reduced price and with a slightly reduced comfort factor.

It's no longer an emotional argument about who's equipment is better or who's hiring now versus later. The industry has changed for ALL of us. SWA guys, for example, won't get the contract they truly deserve because of the problems at DAL. UA and AA. For better or for worse, if you're a professional pilot, you're affected.

 

[asarjfo]

I agree 110%, so why not put the FULL force of ALPA behind some sort of one list and higher pay for regionals.

 

[~~~^~~~]

Passengers do not have the "choice" between an RJ and a MD88. If it were not for the RJ the MD88 route would simply be cancelled with no replacement service. The cost per seat mile and operating economics make these airplanes as different as a 737-800 and a 777.

Even so, passengers have been chosing based on cost and convenience (time) of service. As you have noticed, "frills," like meals on a three hour flight, are relegated to the history books. Based on time constraints, the RJ is a winner, not only for its greater speed, but increased frequency. Passengers don't seem to care whether they are on a B727, an RJ, or a 757. In most cases people today just view transportation as a commodity - a bad trend fueled by Delta's own insistance to market their services over the web where comparison shopping boils down to price.

An interesting side note - looking at this from a pure economics perspective is that the 100 seat jets that are talked about on this board make no sense. With two CRJ200's & a 700 you can park three airplanes per gate. The CRJ900 (too long) and Airbus (too big a footprint) do not allow the ramp space utilization at the only Delta base that turns a profit, ATL.

ALPA is finally beginning to understand that RJ's produce the exact same seat miles that MD88's do and are trying to "take" the airplanes through jets for jobs schemes. That might be effective at Delta, but it would require the realization that to Delta management "a dollar is a dollar." DALPA will not make that concession until 51% of the seniority list is out. The senior guys that control the bargaining are not about to talk concessionary, at least not yet.

For the Connection pilots, ALPA's inability to be proactive has been a Godsend. Poor leadership at ALPA National has been much more effective at removing restrictions on RJ flying than the RJDC could have ever hoped to be. Maybe it is politics and the fact that the senior guys are insulated from the blood bath.

 

[ivauir]

a bad trend?

In most cases people today just view transportation as a commodity - a bad trend

Just curious why you think this is so bad? It seems to me that this is true in part because more people are flying more often. That means more jobs. Of course not all those jobs will be mainline widebody jobs, but airlines exist to provide transportation, not great jobs for pilots. It is just my .02 cents and I don't want a flame war, but if I understand your post I think your thinking is a little out of touch with the times: sure I'd love to fly a 747, but I'd also like to captain a connie. People don't care about inflight means, movies or widebody planes. They just want to get where they are going, cheap, ontime and for minimal hassle. If we can provide that service, we'll grow, if we try to make the customer fit some idea we have, we'll be the next amtrack.