Delta TA

Am I the only one who thinks that a company basing a fleet decision based on a pilot contract vote is all kinds of not our problem?

If a plane fits into your route structure and you can get it affordably, you should do it.

If this was reclaiming CRJ-900s from the regionals, I might tend to say it might be worth taking a kick in the junk. But this is an airplane that cannot be flown by anyone else wearing a Delta logo. Regional flying is in fact returning to mainline, but it's not because of "scope choke" or anything like that. It's returning because the cost to attract pilots to the regional level again is more than simply pulling the flying in house.
 
Screaming_Emu said:
Am I the only one who thinks that a company basing a fleet decision based on a pilot contract vote is all kinds of not our problem?

If a plane fits into your route structure and you can get it affordably, you should do it.

If this was reclaiming CRJ-900s from the regionals, I might tend to say it might be worth taking a kick in the junk. But this is an airplane that cannot be flown by anyone else wearing a Delta logo. Regional flying is in fact returning to mainline, but it's not because of "scope choke" or anything like that. It's returning because the cost to attract pilots to the regional level again is more than simply pulling the flying in house.
Click to expand...

Scope choke is working VERY well.
 
Screaming_Emu said:
Am I the only one who thinks that a company basing a fleet decision based on a pilot contract vote is all kinds of not our problem?
Click to expand...

Fleet decisions affect pilot jobs, which affects relative seniority progression, which affects QOL and upgrade time, which affects career earnings. "Pilots shouldn't vote on airplanes" makes a nice sound byte, but it's not really based on reality.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Fleet decisions affect pilot jobs, which affects relative seniority progression, which affects QOL and upgrade time, which affects career earnings. "Pilots shouldn't vote on airplanes" makes a nice sound byte, but it's not really based on reality.
Click to expand...

So you're saying that DL wants these planes simply so that they can hire more pilots, allow seniority progression and QOL increases?

No. They want them because they want to fill them with people and make money.
 
Screaming_Emu said:
So you're saying that DL wants these planes simply so that they can hire more pilots, allow seniority progression and QOL increases? No. They want them because they want to fill them with people and make money.
Click to expand...

Of course they do. But not having a pilot contract creates uncertainty, and managers and shareholders don't like uncertainty. They have to weigh it against the potential benefits of the aircraft, and when they do that, they sometimes determine that it's better to not spend the money.
 
Screaming_Emu said:
That's not at all what I'm saying.
Click to expand...

I know it's not what you're intending to say, but it is what you're saying for all intents and purposes. Sort of the opposite of the religious people who are very quick to thank God for everything good that happens to them but never think to get mad at God for all the bad things that happen to them. You can't have it both ways.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
I know it's not what you're intending to say, but it is what you're saying for all intents and purposes. Sort of the opposite of the religious people who are very quick to thank God for everything good that happens to them but never think to get mad at God for all the bad things that happen to them. You can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...

What I'm saying is that asking the airlines to give up on the regional game willingly is a HUGE financial ask that would involve giving up a whole hell of a lot. I just haven't seen that happen in any of the recent major pilot contracts.

But don't let me interrupt your guys' circle jerk.
 
Screaming_Emu said:
What I'm saying is that asking the airlines to give up on the regional game willingly is a HUGE financial ask that would involve giving up a whole hell of a lot. I just haven't seen that happen in any of the recent major pilot contracts. But don't let me interrupt your guys' circle jerk.
Click to expand...

No one has asked that of any airline, and that's not what scope choke is. Scope choke is the concept of slowly taking back flying through modest section 1 gains each deal, or even through LOAs and grievance settlements. This results in the flying coming back, without a huge concession needed to trade for it. For example, this agreements reduces the DCI fleet by 25 airframes, and increases the ratio of flying that must be mainline.

It's called scope choke, not scope beheading.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
No one has asked that of any airline, and that's not what scope choke is. Scope choke is the concept of slowly taking back flying through modest section 1 gains each deal, or even through LOAs and grievance settlements. This results in the flying coming back, without a huge concession needed to trade for it. For example, this agreements reduces the DCI fleet by 25 airframes, and increases the ratio of flying that must be mainline.

It's called scope choke, not scope beheading.
Click to expand...

I get that, I support that, but I also believe that if nothing huge changes (9/11 or a huge decrease in training costs) it is nothing but insurance against re-outsourcing later down the road in a different environment.
 
Screaming_Emu said:
I get that, I support that, but I also believe that if nothing huge changes (9/11 or a huge decrease in training costs) it is nothing but insurance against re-outsourcing later down the road in a different environment.
Click to expand...

Even if that were so, it's still incredibly valuable. For the same reason that locking in pay rates instead of variable compensation is valuable.
 
Screaming_Emu said:
I'm all for that.

But I think it's happening because its financially beneficial to do so. Not because of anything that ALPA has done.
Click to expand...

Correct, if it's financially beneficial to do that. Pilot cooperation ties into that in this case.

Believe it our not, Management recognizes that they will have a big problem getting FOs to bid Captain at C2012 rates on the E190. Since they don't want new hire Captains, they are willing to pay a premium for speed, ease, and simplicity of a quick deal. Cue the industry leading rates on all equipment. If this process becomes too much of a headache with the pilots voting down the TA, is a possibility the Company might cancel the deal, drag negotiations out, and use the $1.1 billion to were giving to the pilots to buy used Airbuses or 717s.
 
Trip7 said:
If this process becomes too much of a headache with the pilots voting down the TA, is a possibility the Company might cancel the deal, drag negotiations out, and use the $1.1 billion to were giving to the pilots to buy used Airbuses or 717s.
Click to expand...

Or just deal with the issues of having very junior 190 captains. Airways has made it work just fine and they aren't even "tier 1!!!".

Pilot compensation is a WAY smaller part of the big picture than we'd like to think it is. Although that's mostly because management is always telling us how much it effects things so we don't ask for too much of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top