Delta will lay off 741 ground employees at DTW in April
- Thread starter FWAAA
- Start date
Kev3188
Veteran
I think the idea that many of the DGS employees will simply shift over to Prospect or Menzies is a bit assumptive. Neither offer flight benefits, which may or may not have been what was keeping some people around. Guess we'll see.
It's also interesting that on one hand there is a huge push to get DCI standards (customer service, operational, etc.) up to mainline levels, yet on the other, a step backward in a case like this. Seems like both initiatives run counter to one another. Further, if it's a performance issue, then banking on hiring back the same exact people doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
At any rate, I think dropping this bomb while everyone was distracted with PS celebrations was either really tacky or intentional. Maybe both...
It's also interesting that on one hand there is a huge push to get DCI standards (customer service, operational, etc.) up to mainline levels, yet on the other, a step backward in a case like this. Seems like both initiatives run counter to one another. Further, if it's a performance issue, then banking on hiring back the same exact people doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
At any rate, I think dropping this bomb while everyone was distracted with PS celebrations was either really tacky or intentional. Maybe both...
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #18
I agree with almost every point you have made, Kev.
Not sure how you see this as a backwards step, though. How does a change in contractor run counter to improving standards? Menzies runs AS' contracted ramp and Prospect handles other functions for DL.
Also, a management change could very well change how the workforce is managed. Hard to imangine that DL could not have done that with DGS but it highlights that just like AE, DGS does not have guaranteed access to its parent's work.
The most likely reduction in overall costs comes from people who just began to see some wage progression at DGS and are now whacked back to the bottom or forced to leave. As I noted in my first post on this thread, I find that disgusting but also note that it has happened to regional carrier employees multiple times in their relationships with their legacy carriers.
the timing stunk, plain and simple
No one has mentioned in all of this that DTW is DLs largest 50 seat operation. With an expected fleet of only 125 50 seaters left in the DCI fleet in the near future, there will have to be a restructuring of operations to reduce frequencies or else add a whole lot of capacity at DTW if 50 seaters are replaced by CR7s and up the line. Perhaps the plan is to keep the majority of 50 seat flying at DTW in order to reduce the impact on the hub but DTW still has a fairly high level of 50 seat flying relative to other hubs - and also explains why it was necessary to get as much of that connecting flying out of CVG and MEM and push it over DTW.
some markets will see more capacity but I am betting that DL will rework the bank structure at DTW to reduce the need to increase capacity from DTW to alot of RJ cities, esp. since DTW and LGA/JFK duplicate some of the same flows.
the new contract could be part of a larger picture that isn't apparent to any of us yet.
Not sure how you see this as a backwards step, though. How does a change in contractor run counter to improving standards? Menzies runs AS' contracted ramp and Prospect handles other functions for DL.
Also, a management change could very well change how the workforce is managed. Hard to imangine that DL could not have done that with DGS but it highlights that just like AE, DGS does not have guaranteed access to its parent's work.
The most likely reduction in overall costs comes from people who just began to see some wage progression at DGS and are now whacked back to the bottom or forced to leave. As I noted in my first post on this thread, I find that disgusting but also note that it has happened to regional carrier employees multiple times in their relationships with their legacy carriers.
the timing stunk, plain and simple
No one has mentioned in all of this that DTW is DLs largest 50 seat operation. With an expected fleet of only 125 50 seaters left in the DCI fleet in the near future, there will have to be a restructuring of operations to reduce frequencies or else add a whole lot of capacity at DTW if 50 seaters are replaced by CR7s and up the line. Perhaps the plan is to keep the majority of 50 seat flying at DTW in order to reduce the impact on the hub but DTW still has a fairly high level of 50 seat flying relative to other hubs - and also explains why it was necessary to get as much of that connecting flying out of CVG and MEM and push it over DTW.
some markets will see more capacity but I am betting that DL will rework the bank structure at DTW to reduce the need to increase capacity from DTW to alot of RJ cities, esp. since DTW and LGA/JFK duplicate some of the same flows.
the new contract could be part of a larger picture that isn't apparent to any of us yet.
Glenn Quagmire
Veteran
- Apr 30, 2012
- 4,809
- 4,343
I agree with Kev's post about customer service. I fail to see how a change in contractors to a lower cost entity will result in a stable operational performance.
Hiring back someone at a lower wage while bringing in new hires at low wages does not foster high morale. Coming from an operational background in the airlines, I know how important continuity and morale is. Having a stable team is huge when it comes to safety and efficiency in ramp/line operations.
Delta is doing all it can to destroy that at DTW.
Hiring back someone at a lower wage while bringing in new hires at low wages does not foster high morale. Coming from an operational background in the airlines, I know how important continuity and morale is. Having a stable team is huge when it comes to safety and efficiency in ramp/line operations.
Delta is doing all it can to destroy that at DTW.
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
already been thru it before have you?yoyodyne said:
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,940
- 9,371
Enough of the union baiting on this, guys.
This is ground handling work for the regional flying.
Not a single one of the employees affected had a vote in any of the representation elections at DL. Going down that path in the discussion here is as pointless as WT's deflecting every negative argument against DL as somehow not being as bad as what happened at AA or UA...
Glenn's right that the continuity is a concern, but Prospect and Menzies have existed longer than DGS. It's quite possible they're going to improve things. Sure, they have turnover issues, but there's also no pretending that you're going to work for what they pay and try to justify it with the flight benefits or some association with the parent company.
And WT, don't even think about posting something inane and pandering about how it's good that we agree. This happened to be one of those "broken clock is right twice a day" as far as your opinion is on the issue.
This is ground handling work for the regional flying.
Not a single one of the employees affected had a vote in any of the representation elections at DL. Going down that path in the discussion here is as pointless as WT's deflecting every negative argument against DL as somehow not being as bad as what happened at AA or UA...
Glenn's right that the continuity is a concern, but Prospect and Menzies have existed longer than DGS. It's quite possible they're going to improve things. Sure, they have turnover issues, but there's also no pretending that you're going to work for what they pay and try to justify it with the flight benefits or some association with the parent company.
And WT, don't even think about posting something inane and pandering about how it's good that we agree. This happened to be one of those "broken clock is right twice a day" as far as your opinion is on the issue.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #23
I didn't agree with you. I agreed with Kev who has a pretty good head on his shoulders.eolesen said:
The union vs. non-union argument is even more pointless when you consider that AE pilots have had absolutely no input into the decision of AA to make 50 seat flying even less profitable for employees while holding out a carrot for a few that will stick around and fly the large RJs. AA's biggest desire is to be able to shut down the small RJ operation on its terms. AE pilots threw a wrench into those plans.
In the case of DL and DTW, the impact on DL's operation will be minimal - because for good or bad, the expectation from DL is that these jobs can be done by entry level employees with no career progression. Let's not forget that the city of Detroit has one of the worst economies for a large US city. There are plenty of people willing to work for the wages DL is paying via its contractors.
If DL is really hell bent on destroying DTW, it will be obvious. but the simple fact is we will be talking this time next year and DTW will still be a viable and integrated part of DL's network delivering on the same levels as the other hubs.
Whether I like what happens doesn't change that the hyperbole by people on here about the significance of this action is not realistic.
yoyodyne
Veteran
700UW said:
LOL, just like every day at PHL...
Kev on a somewhat related note what is your sense of the AS ground handling agreement ending the end of this month? I can't imaging the revenue from AS for a single or couple departures make or break the viability keeping stations staffed, but I can't imagine losing the work is a good thing. Aparently in BOS DL will still handle AS on an interim basis pose 2/28/14 perhaps that is the case at other stations too.
Josh
Josh
Glenn Quagmire
Veteran
- Apr 30, 2012
- 4,809
- 4,343
Back on topic, what, if anything, do the DGS employees get with this layoff? Was there a WARN letter issued? Do they have any recourse other than UI Comp?
Kev3188
Veteran
Haven't we already covered this?737823 said:
At any rate,I doubt any station was living or dying by handling AS. Rather, I'm sure it was simply offsetting fixed costs. Ancillary revenue is good. That said, as I noted when this first broke, with many places running so short on manpower, losing these contracts may be seen as a relief
Good question! Honestly, I doubt it, but who knows?Glenn Quagmire said:
