More reason to vote no!

[filejw]

Whats sad is all the people that make statements like DTW22 and have not read the TA. At least read the thing.

 

[JustaNumber]

Could someone at NWA please help me understand why the NW pilots have not been pushing hard to get all these jets on mainline property? It blows my mind that they are voluntarily allowing more outsourcing!!!!!!!!!!!!! :angryfire

 

[Detroitpilot22]

Whats sad is all the people that make statements like DTW22 and have not read the TA. At least read the thing.

It doesnt take reading a bunch of stuff that lawyers wrote to know what is going on here. I will admit i did not know that this 3rd airlink was allowed back in 2004, but let me ask you a question, have you ever heard of mid-atlantic?

 

[Occam's Razor]

Could someone at NWA please help me understand why the NW pilots have not been pushing hard to get all these jets on mainline property?

1. We did. NWA's initial position was "Newco", which would have gobbled-up all DC-9 flying (and jobs) and included new 100-seat jets. All of that flying would have been "sold off" at some point. The T/A essentially changes the RJ size restriction in the contract from 55-seats, to 76-seats. What we pushed hard to get...and got...was retention of our DC-9 fleet and it's replacement. That will include any aircraft above 76-seats. The net result is no more furloughs (recalls likely in early 2007) and employment options for our pilots who are furloughed now.
2. We are in bankruptcy. In 1998 we moved the size limit on Airlink aircraft from 70-seats to 55-seats (with a ratio, and "granfathering" of the 36 MSA Avros). The industry was healthier, and other airlines were making strides in their contracts too. We all had leverage. In bankruptcy, you don't have as much leverage. The sheer number of things in our contract that were under attack was huge, with nearly all of them very important to us. It was matter of priorities and choices.
3. The industry. We weren't the first pilot group to face this choice. Pilots at UAL and AAA (both in bankruptcy), and AMR have already conceded the size of RJ's being flown by their feeders. For that matter, so had DAL, before the bankruptcy. It's not like we had Starship Enterprise deflector shields to protect us from the same forces that hammered the other pilot groups. Although NWA pilots are unquestionably the coolest and most skilled aviators in all the land, we are still vulnerable to kryptonite. And bankruptcy is kryptonite.

It blows my mind that they are voluntarily allowing more outsourcing!!!!!!!!!!!!! :angryfire

"voluntarily"? That's a good one!

 

[DoinTime]

What we pushed hard to get...and got...was retention of our DC-9 fleet and it's replacement. That will include any aircraft above 76-seats. The net result is no more furloughs (recalls likely in early 2007) and employment options for our pilots who are furloughed now.

Retain your DC-9 fleet??? YGTBFKM. Do you think that these 90 or so 76-seaters will be purely growth aircraft and that you will get a 1 to 1 replacement of your DC-9 fleet with whatever they choose to replace it? These 76-seaters will likely replace at least half of your DC-9's. Thats about 900 more fuloughs.

There is a reason recall rights got pushed out to 14 years.

 

[filejw]

Mid Atlantic,yup. And I'm no lawyer but if I can read it anybody can. Before I vote no/yes I always have a look.

 

[Occam's Razor]

Retain your DC-9 fleet??? YGTBFKM. Do you think that these 90 or so 76-seaters will be purely growth aircraft and that you will get a 1 to 1 replacement of your DC-9 fleet with whatever they choose to replace it?

No. There are ratios included to incentify NWA to buy 77-110 seat aircraft to replace the DC-9. We understand that there will be some "tween" flying that would normally have to done by the DC-9 right now...but would be done by the 76-seat Airlink(s) in the future. We also understand that there will be some flying that must be done by aircraft larger than 76-seats. The only option will be the mainline.

It would have been nice to retain everything above 55-seats, but we'd have been the only pilots able to do that.

It's called a "concession" for a reason.

These 76-seaters will likely replace at least half of your DC-9's. Thats about 900 more fuloughs.

Exactly! Steenland will snap his fingers and 150 EMB-175's with fully-trained pilots will appear before our eyes! The DC-9's will be parked with his second finger-snap, and the investors providing the exit financing will think it's all very cool.

(sigh)

The DC-9 fleet represents about 1/4 of our fleet. NWA would not be able to get sufficient exit financing without a commitment to keep that fleet (the 100-117 seat niche) operating for it's service life. There will be attrition from our pilot group while the DC-9 winds down, the 77-110 seaters come online, and the 76-seaters are introduced at our Airlink(s). The PERP will shave some off the top, and "natural causes" will take another 200 before we even exit Chapter 11.

Since we were able to retain our cumbersome and complicated staffing method, and important work rules that affect staffing (trip rigs, avg day, 100% credit for DH, etc), the pilot-to-aircraft ratio will lead the legacy carriers.

There is a reason recall rights got pushed out to 14 years.

Do you know what that reason was?

I do.

 

[DoinTime]

There is no doubt that there are markets for 100-120 seat aircraft. With your newly proposed scope rules NWA pilots will capture all of this flying. Unfortunately, this flying only represents 80-90 aircraft. As bankruptcy drags out the DC-9 fleet will dwindle thus setting the bar very, very low for the "incentive" program you speak of.

Expect a combination of deliveries from both Embraer and Bombardier with significant fleet numbers on the properties of various regionals before the NW exit from bankruptcy.

NWA would not be able to get sufficient exit financing without a commitment to keep that fleet (the 100-117 seat niche) operating for it's service life.

Investors look at sound business plans when looking to provide exit financing. Expanded outsourcing and reductions in labor costs are unfortunately good for business.

Investors could care less the gauge of aircraft being flown but rather the money being pulled in by whatever aircraft are being operated. Most Midwestern markets the DC-9 currently does could easily be replaced with narrower gauge and higher frequency. The higher frequency will produce slightly higher ticket revenues and the more modern (and non-mainline staffed) 76-seat equipment will lower seat mile costs well below that of the -9.