New Delta Connection Carriers

~~~^~~~

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Posts
6,137
Total Time
7,500+
Way to reward the hard working employees at your wholly owned subsidiaries - with a couple of more alter ego competitors. Comair & ASA have no value because they have no market. The future (thanks to Delta) is at not on the Delta property.

-----
Shuttle America, one of Delta's regional partners, will fly the routes using 70-seat Embraer 170 jet aircraft. Delta also announced service between Salt Lake City and Indianapolis on Monday.
------
Effective Oct. 24, Atlanta-based Delta (NYSE: DAL - News) will offer two daily nonstop flights from Austin to Orlando, and two from Orlando to Austin.

Freedom Airlines will operate the Orlando service with Embraer ERJ-145 regional jets.
------


Beginning Oct. 15, new Delta Connection carrier Shuttle America will operate two daily non-stop flights between Salt Lake City and Columbus, Ohio, and two daily non-stop flights between Salt Lake City and Indianapolis. Shuttle America will operate the new service with the latest addition to the Delta Connection carrier fleet -- the new two-cabin, 70-seat Embraer 170 jet aircraft.
 
Last edited:

I.P. Freley

I like people food
Joined
Dec 26, 2001
Posts
2,038
Total Time
Enough
~~~^~~~ said:
Jeesh, I will be glad when Delta finally goes away. Way to reward the hard working employees at your wholly owned subsidiaries.
Yep, Delta is the only mainline company to do business with contractors, so they deserve to "go away"...

In any case, I thought Freedom Airlines was DOA?? Whahappened?
 

bailout

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2001
Posts
988
Total Time
3.5
DCI boosts service to Orlando
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 15, 2005





New Delta Connection carrier Freedom Airlines will offer new nonstop service beginning in October between Orlando, Fla., and six destinations: Austin, Texas; Charlottesville, Va.; Chattanooga, Tenn.; Fort Wayne, Ind.; Jackson, Miss.; and Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport. Delta Connection carriers plan to increase daily service between Orlando and nine more markets by December.

"Delta is continuing to respond to customers' requests for more nonstop flights to their favorite Florida destinations," said J.T. Fisher, president and chief executive officer-Delta Connection. "Thanks to the addition of Freedom Airlines to the Delta Connection program, we are able to connect more of our customers in the Southeast and Midwest to some of the world's leading vacation venues in Orlando."

To celebrate the new service, Delta is offering customers low introductory sale fares.
 

~~~^~~~

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Posts
6,137
Total Time
7,500+
I.P. Freley said:
Yep, Delta is the only mainline company to do business with contractors, so they deserve to "go away"....
Delta is the only company stupid enough to generate alter ego competition & growth (lower costs) while trying to sell their wholly owned regionals which have increasing costs because they are locked out of the next generation of equipment. Delta has destroyed their own brand on so many levels that the "brand" is now meaningless.

Also, in my view the Delta MEC and Delta management are in large part responsible for the devolving standard of our profession thanks to just this sort of alter ego replacement flying.

I don't expect things to turn around. Every move the past two management teams have made have only taken us closer to the abyss. So candidly, Delta is on its way to being history. Do you see any reason for a different conclusion?
 

FDJ2

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2003
Posts
3,908
Total Time
10000+
~~~^~~~ said:
Way to reward the hard working employees at your wholly owned subsidiaries - with a couple of more alter ego competitors.
Well, you wouldn't want any predatory scope limiting access to the DL code now would you? Aren't you a supporter of a lawsuit that has as its premise the belief that no pilot group controls/owns or can place limits on outsourcing?

Quote:

1. Can the DAL pilot group, or any pilot group own/control their code?







In a word, NO. The “code” under which your airline operates is not owned by the Delta pilots and it is not controlled by the Delta pilots. The “code” is owned by Delta Air Lines, Inc. and they alone “control” it. The same applies to other “codes” owned by other airlines.


 

~~~^~~~

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Posts
6,137
Total Time
7,500+
FDJ2 said:
Well, you wouldn't want any predatory scope limiting access to the DL code now would you? Aren't you a supporter of a lawsuit that has as its premise the belief that no pilot group controls/owns or can place limits on outsourcing?
You exemplify the thinking on your MEC and the reason why Giambusso and Mullin reached agreements to lead us to where Delta is now. You are so giddy to see an ASA, or Comair, pilot take a screwing that you completly overlook the fact that these are your 737-200's being replaced. But hey, you don't care, you must be on the MD88 now. When you are on the 767, you will stop caring about narrowbodies all together. As long as you get what you want.

Yes, I support the RJDC lawsuit. The RJDC effort promotes the right of employees to contract with those who have operational control of their airplanes. Eventually, this will happen and you too will benefit by binding the Company to the pilots performing the flying.

Delta's strength is its network. That network is crumbling at its core - the revenue feed into its hubs. The 737's and MD88's are getting old and expensive to maintain. The CRJ200 is getting expensive to operate on $2 a gallon Jet A and the FAA is not helping with weight assumptions that limit what revenue can be carried on short flights.

You do want ASA and Comair to be sold, right? Then you should understand that this action lowers ASA and Comair's market value.
 

I.P. Freley

I like people food
Joined
Dec 26, 2001
Posts
2,038
Total Time
Enough
~~~^~~~ said:
Delta is the only company stupid enough to generate alter ego competition & growth (lower costs) while trying to sell their wholly owned regionals which have increasing costs because they are locked out of the next generation of equipment.

So candidly, Delta is on its way to being history. Do you see any reason for a different conclusion?
Yes I do. From a business perspective it makes perfect sense to use a less expensive regional partner. In doing so they even managed to get Comair to take a pay freeze and are using this against ASA in their contract negotiations. Furthermore, they help insulate themselves from disgruntled labor groups that can paralyze their operation, in case anyone forgot what happened in the spring of '01. They also gain access to the most desirable 70-seat airplane on the market by doing business with a company that has deliveries of these airplanes already scheduled. Sounds like smart business to me, if we take a moment to detach ourselves from our own vested interests.

Delta would be even further in the red if they expanded their wholly-owned operation in place of increasing reliance on contractors... otherwise they wouldn't be doing it.

As for diluting the brand, you'll have to show me evidence that these contractors are doing a noticeably worse job in the Delta system before I'll accept the assertion that SA, CHQ or Freedom are somehow responsible for driving away customers. In at least two of these cases they haven't started operating for Delta yet so in nine months we can revisit this and see how all involved are doing. Ironically, the best way to drive away customers and/or damage your corporate image is to cancel countless flights leave them stranded during the Christmas holiday, which was done by one of those can't-do-any-wrong wholly-owned carriers.
 

miles otoole

Well-known member
Joined
May 7, 2004
Posts
948
Total Time
10k+
~~~^~~~ said:
Delta has destroyed their own brand on so many levels that the "brand" is now meaningless.
Oh, I think when customers start flying on the E-170, the "Delta brand" will convey value right away. So much so, that they'll be more apt to schedule future trips using these aircraft. Much in the same way that commuter customers looked to fly the RJs versus props.
To management, it doesn't matter internally what the brand is. It only matters to the customers.
 

~~~^~~~

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Posts
6,137
Total Time
7,500+
IP and Miles:

You bring up some valid points, but are missing the bigger picture.

  • The pilots serving at the various alter egos will also want better pay and working conditions once the 18 month upgrades and paint jobs begin to fade.
  • Young crews and young equipment are always cheaper. What happens to you five years from now?
  • If you were selling an old car, would leave it broken, then park it in between your Corvette and your Mercedes?
New planes and quick upgrades are very appealing. But, we are seeing this industry devolve into operators with a 5 year, or less, time horizon. Chautauqua's pricing structure under these contracts is unsustainable without growth, meaning that these airlines will grow like a weed on glyphosate and die just as quickly when the growth is up.

Delta is allowing their wholly owned regionals to "mature" and getting older in the airline business is a very bad thing. Not only are the airplanes and crews getting more expensive, things are getting so out of hand that ASA can not hire and retain enough pilots to sustain its operation. We lost 40 lines of flying last month alone and the explanation I hear is "crew shortage." After all, who would want to work here - all the shiny new E170's are going to the new exciting alter ego carriers.

Regardless of whether your time horizon is 20 years or the next 20 days, Delta's destruction of a core asset does not bode well for Delta's survival. CHQ, Republic Wexford, Mid Atlantic, Shuttle, Freedom airlines are getting some pretty airplanes, but without Delta's marketing and network are one flight away from being parked in the desert besides the 737-200 they are replacing. Just like us, you need Delta to survive.
 

foreverfo

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 6, 2005
Posts
120
Total Time
5000
All of this 170/190 flying done at McDonald wages is really hurting everyone's chances of ever getting to a major. Seems the best thing to do is to bring the planes to mainline and setting a B scale or something. Surely a B scale would be higher than an "express" wage.

Anyone agree? Or am I the retard? I personally don't want to be stuck flying a pencil jet for 30 yrs to all of these markets where DC-9s and 737 used to serve at my $64/hr. I'll be more than happy serving these market at say $120/hr in something bigger. Better yet would be to get paid $120/hr to sit in the right seat doing one leg a day to Vegas and having something more than a reduced overnight! JMHO.
 

JoeMerchant

ASA pilot
Joined
Mar 31, 2005
Posts
6,353
Total Time
14000+
foreverfo said:
All of this 170/190 flying done at McDonald wages is really hurting everyone's chances of ever getting to a major. Seems the best thing to do is to bring the planes to mainline and setting a B scale or something. Surely a B scale would be higher than an "express" wage.

Anyone agree? Or am I the retard? I personally don't want to be stuck flying a pencil jet for 30 yrs to all of these markets where DC-9s and 737 used to serve at my $64/hr. I'll be more than happy serving these market at say $120/hr in something bigger. Better yet would be to get paid $120/hr to sit in the right seat doing one leg a day to Vegas and having something more than a reduced overnight! JMHO.

foreverfo,

In a perfect world under the old paradigm you would be correct about bringing the planes to mainline so that the jobs would pay more. However the paradigm has changed in this new world, the mainline jobs have already been brought down to the level of the best regionals. Senior ASA, CMR, Horizon, Air Wisc., and even senior CHQ pilots now make more than most mainline FOs. In addition, the fabulous "A fund" retirement plans that once separated "major" and "regional" jobs are all but dead. Those that aren't yet will be shortly. Finally, the fabulous schedules of the major airline pilot has also flown west. ASA CRJ 200 schedules are BETTER than any 737-200 Delta schedule and better than most MD-80 schedules.

Add to this the fact that IF a major pilot union does negotiate to fly the E170/190, they will most likely have to UNDERBID the highest paid regionals to win the bidding.

To summarize, as a senior ASA pilot, I would take a paycut, work more days, and give up vacation just for the "privledge" of flying the 170/190 at a "Major" airline. I think I'll pass and just take the larger airplanes here instead.

In hindsight, what you propose SHOULD have been done 20+ years ago with the Metro's at Eastern Express, however ALPA in it's infinite wisdom dropped the ball - or more accurately didn't see the ball coming and it is just now smacking them right between the eyes.

Joe
 
Last edited:

I.P. Freley

I like people food
Joined
Dec 26, 2001
Posts
2,038
Total Time
Enough
~~~^~~~ said:
You bring up some valid points, but are missing the bigger picture.



  • The pilots serving at the various alter egos will also want better pay and working conditions once the 18 month upgrades and paint jobs begin to fade.
  • Young crews and young equipment are always cheaper. What happens to you five years from now?
Frankly, that's not Delta's problem, that's Wexford's problem. If RAH can't keep their costs down, then they will be underbid by someone else. Delta's flying got given away to the wholly-owned carriers (that weren't always wholly-owned, of course) because they were a cheaper product. Comair/ASA's flying (well, Delta's flying) got given away to contract carriers because they are a cheaper product. Someday probably RAH's flying (well, Delta's flying) will be given away to whomever offers a cheaper product.

Delta doesn't care about disgruntled FO's at SA/CHQ/etc until those FO's cause a problem with the operation. Delta wants the shiny planes and the lower costs, to want anything different is to make a poor business case for a company that is allegedly about to go Chap. 11 and who has a stock price so low that sixty shares will buy you a carton of cigarettes.

In the end, what's good for Mother Delta is what's good for Mother Delta. If it's bad for Comair and ASA, that's just too bad to a Suit in the boardroom. It seems pretty easy to understand for someone who doesn't have anything directly vested in any of this (which I don't but assume you do).


~~~^~~~ said:
Delta's destruction of a core asset...


Just like us, you need Delta to survive.

I'm a little confused by this one. If that asset won't survive without the Delta corporate teet, how much of an asset is it? It wouldn't take long to replace ALL those wholly-owned airplanes with contractors... I think the Independence experience has shown how easy it is to lose money when all you fly (or most of what you fly) is RJ's. Especially as the price of fuel goes up the RJ's make less and less sense on their own, and the Mother Ship paying the fuel bills is all that keeps most RJ operators afloat.
 
Last edited:

foreverfo

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 6, 2005
Posts
120
Total Time
5000
Well Joe...

That's the exact thinking process that I hate to hear. We have that same thinking here at XJT. Why leave a cushy place with good schedules, working rules and QOL.?..and it's not all that great. We've had numerous guys deferr their call to go to CAL for that same thinking..it's a shame.

I knew I should of taken my dad's advice and gone into the real world with a real job to make real money...20/20 is hindsight...could of would of should of...who would of thunk it!
 

JoeMerchant

ASA pilot
Joined
Mar 31, 2005
Posts
6,353
Total Time
14000+
foreverfo said:
Well Joe...

That's the exact thinking process that I hate to hear. We have that same thinking here at XJT. Why leave a cushy place with good schedules, working rules and QOL.?..and it's not all that great. We've had numerous guys deferr their call to go to CAL for that same thinking..it's a shame.

I knew I should of taken my dad's advice and gone into the real world with a real job to make real money...20/20 is hindsight...could of would of should of...who would of thunk it!

This career has changed forever. I understand your frustration, but wishing it weren't true won't change anything. I once thought like you do, but now instead of treating my "next job" as the most important, I now treat my "current job" as the most important.

Good luck,
Joe
 

FDJ2

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2003
Posts
3,908
Total Time
10000+
~~~^~~~ said:
Yes, I support the RJDC lawsuit. The RJDC effort promotes the right of employees to contract with those who have operational control of their airplanes. Eventually, this will happen and you too will benefit by binding the Company to the pilots performing the flying.
But binding a Company to its pilots is not what the RJDC seeks through its lawsuit. Furthermore, the RJDC does not differentiate between wholly owned or not. Surely you must know this. The RJDC does not believe that any pilot group can control its airline's code. You do know that, don't you?
 

JoeMerchant

ASA pilot
Joined
Mar 31, 2005
Posts
6,353
Total Time
14000+
FDJ2 said:
But binding a Company to its pilots is not what the RJDC seeks through its lawsuit. Furthermore, the RJDC does not differentiate between wholly owned or not. Surely you must know this. The RJDC does not believe that any pilot group can control its airline's code. You do know that, don't you?
FDJ2,
This is not correct. The RJDC does believe that a pilot group can control it's own airline's code. What the RJDC does not believe is that a pilot group can control another pilot group and still uphold ALPA's DFR.

An example would be if ASA or CMR were to start flying 737's as ASA or CMR. Outside of the Delta code, I do not believe that ALPA thru the DALMEC has a right to stop that.

The RJDC believes scope is important. How that scope is used and managed is just as important. Are we looking out for ourselves - YOU BETTCHA WE ARE!

Joe
 

~~~^~~~

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Posts
6,137
Total Time
7,500+
FDJ: You are twisting statements and you know it. Scope binds a company to its pilots. "All Delta flying performed by Delta pilots" is an example of scope.

What you advocate is using one airline's scope to control another airlines' flying - that is not scope, it is a remote control device.

If the Delta MEC wants RJ flying, fine, take it. However, if you have no interest in performing RJ flying, then allow the pilots performing that flying to engage in the legal collective bargaining process without blocking their efforts to gain scope.

Your MEC's "remote control" of RJ flying has unleased an alter ego storm that is coming ashore on your 737's and MD88's. As your MEC votes without regard for the "industry," the rest of the industry is eating away at your seniority list (votes) and relevance (fleet size). You need the RJDC, but by the time you realize it we might be eating lunch outside an AirInc. seminar.
 

fatazz

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Posts
48
Total Time
4000
CHQ pilots now make more than most mainline FOs

Please tell me you do not really think this.
 

MedFlyer

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 7, 2003
Posts
455
Total Time
1200
I don't think most ASA/CMR pilots should be that upset. ASA/CMR have enjoyed an unprecedented amount of growth over the last decade. This growth wasn't going to last forever, eventually the growth was going to be shifted back to mainline.

However, mainline has decided they aren't all that interested in growth, so the growth instead has gone to the contract carriers. The flying being done by the SA E170's is replacing mainline.

For example, DL is replacing 2x733 SLC-DTW with 3xE170. DL gets roughly the same capacity, better frequency and a two class product. Everyone's a winner except the DL mainline pilots. They will continue to lose as mainline shrinks.
 

FDJ2

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2003
Posts
3,908
Total Time
10000+
~~~^~~~ said:
FDJ: You are twisting statements and you know it. Scope binds a company to its pilots. "All Delta flying performed by Delta pilots" is an example of scope.

No, I am quoting one of the RJDC's biggest supporters when he was asked a simple question.

Quote:

1. Can the DAL pilot group, or any pilot group own/control their code?






In a word, NO. The “code” under which your airline operates is not owned by the Delta pilots and it is not controlled by the Delta pilots. The “code” is owned by Delta Air Lines, Inc. and they alone “control” it. The same applies to other “codes” owned by other airlines.


I'm not twisting any statements, that's a direct quote.




What you advocate is using one airline's scope to control another airlines' flying - that is not scope, it is a remote control device.
No, you are advocating the elimination of a pilots group's right to bind his company to his contract by eliminating scope. I am simply advocating the right of a pilot group (DALPA) to limit the outsourcing of it's company's code (DL). Again, you have no right to a single hour of DL code flying, it's not your code or your flying. The fact that you chose to work for a contractor is your problem.
 
Top