Delta removes y/c seats after f/a input
- Thread starter BABABOOY
- Start date
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
topDawg
Veteran
- Nov 23, 2010
- 2,957
- 2,353
I'll try this one more timeWorldTraveler said:
"The 737-900ERs, which were in addition to an existing order, were to be deployed as replacements for other narrowbody aircraft scheduled to retire through 2019."
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
Kev3188
Veteran
Now that we're spending money to reconfigure the reconfiguration, I have to ask; where was the input/planning the first time around?
- Thread Starter
- #36
good question, we do have inflight reps when reviewing a/c configurations, howeverKev3188 said:
I guess the bean counters won the first go around.
and of course, millions of $$ later......
Kev3188
Veteran
I suspect you're right.
I really think that this is the sort of thing that our company needs to get out in front of. Health/safety teams, ASAP, Pro Stan, and "real" input throughout the design process(es) would save a lot of resources over the long run. If they truly want to be "nimble," these are great areas to start in.
I really think that this is the sort of thing that our company needs to get out in front of. Health/safety teams, ASAP, Pro Stan, and "real" input throughout the design process(es) would save a lot of resources over the long run. If they truly want to be "nimble," these are great areas to start in.
- Thread Starter
- #38
True but can you agree that at least they admit their mistakes and are rectifying them?
Kev3188
Veteran
Sure it's nice that they're rectifying them, though I'm cynical enough to glance askance at how much "advertising" of it they're doing...
I would just like to see these mistakes not happen in the first place, and I think there is no shortage of experience/knowledge/whatever to make that happen.
I would just like to see these mistakes not happen in the first place, and I think there is no shortage of experience/knowledge/whatever to make that happen.
- Thread Starter
- #40
yes in a perfect world.
not everyone gets it right 100% of the time
in this case it has cost Delta Millions. Hopefully
some heads did roll and hopefully they have learned
from their mistakes.
Also shows the power of the F/A's and the direct relationship we have.
Mistakes happen and we work together to get them fixed.
not everyone gets it right 100% of the time
in this case it has cost Delta Millions. Hopefully
some heads did roll and hopefully they have learned
from their mistakes.
Also shows the power of the F/A's and the direct relationship we have.
Mistakes happen and we work together to get them fixed.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
The galley configuration that DL chose for the A320 family is offered as an option by Airbus and is used by other airlines. McDonnell Douglas doesn't build jets so they couldn't offer that option now and I don't know if it was offered at the aircraft entered service but having only one galley is fairly standard as an option on most aircraft.
The only way that DL could have known that the configuration didn't work for DL would be to build a prototype and allow DL FAs to work it for months to get feedback or to lease a plane that has that configuration.
Yes, knowing in advance what would have been expected is ideal but sometimes that isn't possible.
Further, it is precisely because fuel prices have been low - which wasn't expected - that the economics of pulling seats back off is financially possible.
The bigger point is that DL listened to its FAs and removed seats in order to improve their service.
I'd love to hear where other carriers have done that.
Given that DL is the only US carrier that has lie flat crew rest seats off of the passenger cabin on 100% of its widebody international fleet, it would appear that DL listens to its FAs and their concerns far more than other carriers. I would find it hard to believe that any FA group is OK with not having something less than what DL offers its FAs.
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,988
- 9,428
Finally, someone asks the real question in all this.Kev3188 said:
DL went too far with the last reconfig, and adding seats without adding bin space created a problem onboard.
They need to do something about it, and it sounds like the right decision, but was this really driven by the flight attendants, or was it manifesting itself in customer complaints and delays?
I find it interesting that instead of spinning it to be improving the customer experience, they're trying to paint it as being employee-driven.
Granted there's no shortage of investment on the customer side to point at, but was there a reason DL saw it necessary to throw the FA's a PR bone? Weren't the 14.5% "raises" enough?
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
bin space had nothing to do with the issue. And the overhead bins on the new aircraft are larger and the 320/319s are getting bid retrofits that increase space far more than the extra seats.
The problem was that DL FAs couldn't work within a galley configuration that is offered by Airbus and which is used on other carriers who fly McD D products.
DL's service IS better. DL offers whole cans of soda on request for all customers, DL offers a snack to all customers, DL does full cart service.
Those are all valid reasons. DL could not have known how the new galleys would have worked in real life FOR DL CUSTOMERS and WITH DL FAs without simulating them.
to try and make the argument into something beyond that shows not only a profound lack of understanding of the real issues.
DL IS fixing the problem.
There are far larger differences in FA working and compensation conditions that exist between DL and other carriers - including crew rest facilities - that other carriers aren't even trying to fix - whether at the rquest of a union or not.
It's also worth noting that DL's old proposed 321 seat config yielded the same number of total seats as other US' carrier 321s and the same is true with other models.
The problem was that DL FAs couldn't work within a galley configuration that is offered by Airbus and which is used on other carriers who fly McD D products.
DL's service IS better. DL offers whole cans of soda on request for all customers, DL offers a snack to all customers, DL does full cart service.
Those are all valid reasons. DL could not have known how the new galleys would have worked in real life FOR DL CUSTOMERS and WITH DL FAs without simulating them.
to try and make the argument into something beyond that shows not only a profound lack of understanding of the real issues.
DL IS fixing the problem.
There are far larger differences in FA working and compensation conditions that exist between DL and other carriers - including crew rest facilities - that other carriers aren't even trying to fix - whether at the rquest of a union or not.
It's also worth noting that DL's old proposed 321 seat config yielded the same number of total seats as other US' carrier 321s and the same is true with other models.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
You have consistently tried to act as if you are a DL insider and yet you repeatedly come up with completely incorrect conclusions.
The FAs and the company said nothing about overhead space. You are simply trying to act like an insider by bringing something into the conversation that has nothing to do with it.
The locked crew overhead bins have nothing to do with the galley changes other than DL is doing them at the same time.
FAs should have locked overhead bins for their own bags but at the same time DL is dramatically increasing the amount of overhead space throughtout the cabin.
To try to connect the lack of success with the galley change to overhead bin changes is factually incorrect esp. since the cabin mods are resulting in far more overhead bin space than the few extra seats.
FAs aren't carrying more luggage on or taking up any more overhead bin space... they are just not willing to share that space with passengers.
And MANY airlines have locked overhead bins for FAs. the concept is hardly a DL novelty.
FACT.
The FAs and the company said nothing about overhead space. You are simply trying to act like an insider by bringing something into the conversation that has nothing to do with it.
The locked crew overhead bins have nothing to do with the galley changes other than DL is doing them at the same time.
FAs should have locked overhead bins for their own bags but at the same time DL is dramatically increasing the amount of overhead space throughtout the cabin.
To try to connect the lack of success with the galley change to overhead bin changes is factually incorrect esp. since the cabin mods are resulting in far more overhead bin space than the few extra seats.
FAs aren't carrying more luggage on or taking up any more overhead bin space... they are just not willing to share that space with passengers.
And MANY airlines have locked overhead bins for FAs. the concept is hardly a DL novelty.
FACT.
Similar threads
