Leader Throws Carrot To Employees

[76200]

With all this talk of adding 60 A 320's to the mainline fleet, exactly
what minimum number of mainline hulls will that give us ?

Is it spelled out, if we add 60 A 320's to mainline fleet, we will
then add that number to the 279 minimum number of mainline hulls ?

So 279 + 60 = 339 minimum mainline hulls.

Is this the math we're talking about here ?

Or are we talking about the math of we just keep parking airbus equipment
or older 737 equipment, and replace those aircraft with the new A 320's ?

If this is the math, then we never really go above the minimum 279 number.

76200

 

[BoeingBoy]

76200,

I've been out flying this week so could have missed something, but have seen nowhere where anyone "official" other than Chip said that the "potential" 60 airplanes were 320's.

As for total count - who knows.

Jim

 

[76200]

Jim,

You're absolutely right.

You might say I was speculating on the speculation.

Nothing was missed.

Definitely nothing official.

Thanks for the clarification.

76200

 

[BoeingBoy]

76200,

If we're speculating, I asked on another thread how many Buses would be parked if the company lost the outsourcing battle and decided not to do the maintenance in house. The answer was 2 per month. Coming up towards that 60 figure.

Also was told by FAA inspector riding jumpseat that "company people" told him that the 737's coming up on heavy checks were going to be parked. How many is that? Don't know.

Jim

 

[delldude]

76200,

If we're speculating, I asked on another thread how many Buses would be parked if the company lost the outsourcing battle and decided not to do the maintenance in house. The answer was 2 per month. Coming up towards that 60 figure.

Also was told by FAA inspector riding jumpseat that "company people" told him that the 737's coming up on heavy checks were going to be parked. How many is that? Don't know.

Jim

if they lost the outsourcing battle and decided not to do them in house?wouldn't that kind of be thumbing their noses to the courts?
and if they decided to park rather than fix....don't they still continue to pay the leases?
same response on parking the 737's when they come up on heavy work.....they still pay the lessors.....we don't own the 737's anymore,doesn't bronner and GE?
you kind of got me here... :huh:
my point is i don't think there is a magic fix for any of these scenarios you've mentioned...like how they going to do all this while hurting for cash? :blink:

 

[BoeingBoy]

Dell,

As far as I know you're right. I suppose it's possible that the leases have some provision or other that would let the planes be returned to the leasors, but have no knowledge of that.

On the other hand, would Siegel cut off his nose to spite his face.....

Jim

 

[BusFlt321]

The Pilot contract modifications Chip mentioned, except for the 90 hours a month (That is UNSAFE) are reasonable. They are modest changes. However it will be impossible to fly 60 additional airplanes without a recall. Just the training float alone will require 100+ recalls. 120 retirements in 2004 will require a recall. And your brand new "preferential bid" process is not that much of a savior. Most line pilots are at max hard flight time already. The soft time is from vacation..we are ALL senior so there is lots of it...from sick time..we are all older so there is lots of it..and from bonehead scheduling which we do not control. We could make a fortune here but the CCY boys keep fighting us instead of the other airlines.
BusFlt321

 

[delldude]

The Pilot contract modifications Chip mentioned, except for the 90 hours a month (That is UNSAFE) are reasonable. They are modest changes. However it will be impossible to fly 60 additional airplanes without a recall. Just the training float alone will require 100+ recalls. 120 retirements in 2004 will require a recall. And your brand new "preferential bid" process is not that much of a savior. Most line pilots are at max hard flight time already. The soft time is from vacation..we are ALL senior so there is lots of it...from sick time..we are all older so there is lots of it..and from bonehead scheduling which we do not control. We could make a fortune here but the CCY boys keep fighting us instead of the other airlines.
BusFlt321

i hear ya....you ought to see what we have to put up with as mechanics...both PIT and CLT are short handed with all kinds of a/c problems...all kinds drop ins,mods and the like.rob one dock to do work on another dock and now that docks gets behind.....with the 737 lap joints and if the buses come in house...i'd say something quite drastic will have to give.
send help

 

[autofixer]

Perhaps the "60 planes" are ERJs? You park the 737s as they come due on heavy checks, replace them with ERJs, furlough more employees, the furlouhees get picked up by MDA and, just like that, the costs are reduced. Management lowers costs and the unions get to feel good, because they protected jobs--their dues continue to flow in, albeit at a reduced rate. As far as management is concerned, it is a win win for everyone. :angry:

 

[delldude]

Perhaps the "60 planes" are ERJs? You park the 737s as they come due on heavy checks, replace them with ERJs, furlough more employees, the furlouhees get picked up by MDA and, just like that, the costs are reduced. Management lowers costs and the unions get to feel good, because they protected jobs--their dues continue to flow in, albeit at a reduced rate. As far as management is concerned, it is a win win for everyone. :angry:

one thing uncle dave said was he wanted to "grow the airline" by 60.i'd hope that meant what it said.
they can not afford to park these planes...for one thing they're both owned by GE and RSA and i don't see them letting this happen....i think in the long run they're going to have to eat it. we've heard the rumor of parking when they come due for those bulkhead and lap mods..but who wants an unserviceable plane these days?