Regional Elite Ground Handling Shutting Down

[Kev3188]

While DL had REAS and Comair working mainline in the past. The total savings was over 2 million yearly(not having M/L). This was due to the fact that the name aboved starting pay was $9.00 and top was around $14. They where able to pay this wages due to their partnership with DL.

MIA vendors (BY LAW) must pay a minimun (as of today) $13.41HR. This rate has gone up since the beginning of a cost of living program that began here back in 2003. The wages went from one day of $5.25 to $10.20 and have risen every 6 months or so to where we are at now. In Oct 23 it will go up to $13.89hr and keep rising to $15.00hr by winter of 2013.

So any contracter will have to charge DL at least $16+hr to be profitable.

Good info. Thanks.

Thanks for the info REPUS.
Question, How many flights does D E L T A have in MIA?

An avg. of 19.5/daily. Not sure of M/L & DCI mix.

Does it have to reach a certain amount of DL M/L flights to go DL M/L ramp?

There is no threshold. Cities like RDU & CLT have much more flight activity than this, and are still outsourced.

So in short, I guess there is no "number" that Delta is committed to in writing?

DL doesn't "commit" to anything in writing...

 

[Airlinelifer]

Good info. Thanks.



An avg. of 19.5/daily. Not sure of M/L & DCI mix.



There is no threshold. Cities like RDU & CLT have much more flight activity than this, and are still outsourced.




DL doesn't "commit" to anything in writing...

Damn I miss the 49 M/L flights a week to have M/L ramp that we had a few years ago.
OTZERO and seniority lists.....

 

[WorldTraveler]

off the top of my head, I would guess the vast majority of DL's MIA operation is mainline - ATL, JFK, LGA, DTW, MSP, and LAX - if for no other reason than the distance.
Keep in mind, though, that DL had a buildup of MIA last year that included a lot of RJ flights within the SE that was pulled down along w/ the LHR flight. Thus, even w/ the addition of LGA this year, DL's operation at MIA is smaller than it was a year ago although it is almost entirely mainline.

RDU and CLT, in part due to geography, have much higher percentages of RJ flights. Each of those two cities have only 1 flt/day to NYC on mainline equipment. ATL is mostly mainline from those cities while the rest of the hubs are split between large RJs and mainline.

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

Kev3188,

Here's hoping that the dumping of R E, which 'could' drive up the "unpopular RR" #'s system wide ..be enough to WAKE UP those MORONS who vote NO, or did not vote, when the next/soon ? ....IAM vote comes around. IMO, the IAM should ALREADY be using the ' R E ' thing to 'Pound Home' thier message in EVERY DL station !

 

[Kev3188]

Damn I miss the 49 M/L flights a week to have M/L ramp that we had a few years ago.
OTZERO and seniority lists.....

Me too, man, me too...

The current equivalents for the OTZERO & seniority lists pale in comparison, and of course, lack of scope speaks for itself.

P.S. I think it's ridiculous that the AMT's and F/A's have both system-wide and by-base lists easily accessible to them, and ACS does not.

off the top of my head, I would guess the vast majority of DL's MIA operation is mainline - ATL, JFK, LGA, DTW, MSP, and LAX - if for no other reason than the distance.

Just went and looked; all M/L.

Keep in mind, though, that DL had a buildup of MIA last year that included a lot of RJ flights within the SE that was pulled down along w/ the LHR flight. Thus, even w/ the addition of LGA this year, DL's operation at MIA is smaller than it was a year ago although it is almost entirely mainline.

I thought of that before I wrote; even with the intra-Florida & LHR flights being pulled down, there is still a core of work that could- and ideally would- justify M/L employees.

RDU and CLT, in part due to geography, have much higher percentages of RJ flights. Each of those two cities have only 1 flt/day to NYC on mainline equipment. ATL is mostly mainline from those cities while the rest of the hubs are split between large RJs and mainline.

Aware of that, too. Doesn't change the fact that a city with ~ 50 flts. daily & one with ~ 33 daily should have it's own employees below wing. IMO, the case gets easier to make when considering that the work involved with an RJ is on a par with working a NB flight.

Kev3188,

Here's hoping that the dumping of R E, which 'could' drive up the "unpopular RR" #'s system wide ..be enough to WAKE UP those MORONS who vote NO, or did not vote, when the next/soon ? ....IAM vote comes around. IMO, the IAM should ALREADY be using the ' R E ' thing to 'Pound Home' thier message in EVERY DL station !

The idea that DL will even whipsaw 2 of it's own wholly owned subsidiaries (and the fact that they had them to compete with the own employees!) should not be lost on anyone.

According to a (now retired) SVP, the RR program has seen exponential growth over the last 3-5 years in stations that are already staffed. That growth is something the IAM will ignore at their own peril...

 

[737823]

According to a (now retired) SVP, the RR program has seen exponential growth over the last 3-5 years in stations that are already staffed. That growth is something the IAM will ignore at their own peril...

Kev, Tim posted up thread the IAM supported and encouraged RR at Hawaiian on the condition that RRs become full IAM members. Do you see DL being any different? You said before that it is not necessarily a bad thing but there needs to be limits in place and it shouldn't be their primary means for hiring and staffing. Do you know in large stations like ATL, DTW, JFK, SLC, etc how much of ACS and ramp are RR and how much are PT/FT compared to non-hubs?

Josh

 

[Kev3188]

Kev, Tim posted up thread the IAM supported and encouraged RR at Hawiian on the condition that RRs become full IAM members. Do you see DL being any different?

I think the "anything for dues" idea is flawed, and something I'm working to change.

That said, I think any campaign at DL needs to recognize that the program isn't going to disappear anytime soon. We also need to recognize that there are some people that like the program, and want to stay in it- it's just not as many as the company would like people to think.

I would like to see definitive percentage caps on it's use, but I also have no issue with it being an entry point to employment. When it becomes the end result is where I object. Sure, some people get upgraded, but there is little upward movement in most stations.

At NW, we used to only hire temp-to-perm (with a few exceptions), and a return to that would be fine both for economic reasons, and for "vetting" reasons. Along with that, I would like to see the IAM more proactively involved with any hiring decisions, and probationary evaluations; I think it would result in a much better ROI for everyone involved.

You said before that it is not necessarily a bad thing but there needs to be limits in place and it shouldn't be their primary means for hiring and staffing. Do you in large stations like ATL, DTW, JFK, SLC, etc how much of ACS and ramp are RR and how much are PT/FT compared to non-hubs?

The stated goal is a 50/50 mix. W/O looking, I'm not sure of the percentages in each specific city, but know that it's close to that in many places. My station is currently at ~ 35%, and since all backfilling of regular positions is done via the RR program, we should hit 50/50 in short order.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Kev,
I don't think there is any doubt that the industry is in a final stage of "adjustment" post-deregulation and that there could be alot of things change as a result of what takes place in the next few months or years.

Precisely because alot of the turbulence at alot of DL's competitors, DL is seeing alot of success in expanding its network - and that has the potential to help DL employees across the board; DL's success over the decades is due in large part to the fact that DL has run its business relatively well in the midst of a lot of turbulence in the rest of the industry.

I am certain that UA is trying to delay making more agreements regaring increased pay and integration pending some insight into how the industry will shake out as well.

You know what I have said before about putting pressure where it needs to be used to obtain what you believe is necessary, even if it is not through the means you necessarily would like to accomplish it....

 

[Airlinelifer]

With the "final stage of adjustment post-deregulation," we will have two world wide american mega-carriers, (UA. DL), a third mega carrier in development (AA - US) and the domestic heavy weight (WN). Once the dust settles and their is stability by the "critical mass" these carriers create, what will be DL's next excuse to not expand opportunities in those cities that should be open to M/L ramp?

I'm am not talking about smaller communities that have a few flights, I'm talking about cities with 15 to 20, up to 50 flights a day.

By every DOT parameter, the combined DL/NW ramp is kicking airline ass.

 

[Kev3188]

Once the dust settles and their is stability by the "critical mass" these carriers create, what will be DL's next excuse to not expand opportunities in those cities that should be open to M/L ramp?

They won't need one. No CBA= no accountability to the masses.

I'm am not talking about smaller communities that have a few flights, I'm talking about cities with 15 to 20, up to 50 flights a day.

Assuming I can still add, there are 21 domestic cities with a total of more than 15 average flights/daily (using October's schedule) currently outsourced.

By every DOT parameter, the combined DL/NW ramp is kicking airline ass.

Truth.

 

[737823]

I think the "anything for dues" idea is flawed, and something I'm working to change.

That said, I think any campaign at DL needs to recognize that the program isn't going to disappear anytime soon. We also need to recognize that there are some people that like the program, and want to stay in it- it's just not as many as the company would like people to think.

I would like to see definitive percentage caps on it's use, but I also have no issue with it being an entry point to employment. When it becomes the end result is where I object. Sure, some people get upgraded, but there is little upward movement in most stations.

At NW, we used to only hire temp-to-perm (with a few exceptions), and a return to that would be fine both for economic reasons, and for "vetting" reasons. Along with that, I would like to see the IAM more proactively involved with any hiring decisions, and probationary evaluations; I think it would result in a much better ROI for everyone involved.



The stated goal is a 50/50 mix. W/O looking, I'm not sure of the percentages in each specific city, but know that it's close to that in many places. My station is currently at ~ 35%, and since all backfilling of regular positions is done via the RR program, we should hit 50/50 in short order.

Kev, when you say you want to change "anything for dues" mentality what specifically do you mean? You realize the IAM has fewer members today than even a few years ago and significantly fewer than the near 1 million members they had in the 1970s. In fairness I'm not sure the concept of union leaders protecting jobs and engaging in organizing simply for dues is unique to the IAM.

What do you mean by having the IAM make hiring decisions? Are you advocating for a hiring hall arrangement like carpenters, electricians, plumbers, etc? DL is the employer they should be able to make hiring decisions pursuant to the closed shop as required by the RLA.

I could be wrong but I would assume most people in the RR program probably do not favor the prospect of union representation but I may be wrong. Think about, if they are working 200-1000 hours/year at a job that pays ~$12/hour and no benefits besides flight passes why would an RR employee want to pay for a bargaining agent that would likely work to advance the interests of full time permanent employees? Especially for people that like the terms and flexibility RR offers why would they support a union that would work to curb the use of the program? It's like the UFCW that make the student baggers and parking lot attendants at supermarkets pay hefty initiation fees as a condition of employment to join the union. Many of the people in these positions don't intend to stay for long while the fulltime workers reap the benefits of this.

Do you know if DL current hires FT/PT for airport operations or do they only promote from within? If so, what determines eligibility for those positions? Do managers select based on performance or is it done strictly by seniority?

Josh

 

[Kev3188]

Kev, when you say you want to change "anything for dues" mentality what specifically do you mean?

I mean you take the time to find the "right candidate," instead of the "right now" candidate. The company is the one investing in the employee, but labor also has a vested interest, since we have to work with them.

I've said it before (and Bob Owens touches on it sometimes on the AA board), but on a macro level, a union needs to decide if they want the proverbial 20 people at $10/hr., or 10 at $20/hr.

You realize the IAM has fewer members today than even a few years ago and significantly fewer than the near 1 million members they had in the 1970s.

Yes I do. A big part of that is due to the successful demonization of labor by monied corporate interest, but part of that is because of the devaluation of our labor by "big" labor.

This is a rough analogy, but on a micro scale, as a crew chief, let's say I need 10 people to do a job safely and efficiently. I won't go with 8, but by the same token won't ask for 13. Does that make sense?

In fairness I'm not sure the concept of union leaders protecting jobs and engaging in organizing simply for dues is unique to the IAM.

It's not. Not all unions operate that way, though, and it's something we need to look at changing. I want to labor to be seen as professionals that bring value to the show; not dues whores.

What do you mean by having the IAM make hiring decisions? Are you advocating for a hiring hall arrangement like carpenters, electricians, plumbers, etc? DL is the employer they should be able to make hiring decisions pursuant to the closed shop as required by the RLA.

No, no. Not to make them exclusively, but rather to be involved in not only the hiring decision, but also the performance evaluation process. We used to do that at NW, but got away from it. The DL process is even more disconnected.

Note: if it was me, the first thing I would do is toss the STARS method out the nearest window.

I could be wrong but I would assume most people in the RR program probably do not favor the prospect of union representation but I may be wrong.

Tough to say. I can tell you that in my experience, RR's generally want the same things anyone else does (fairness, respect, etc.).

Think about, if they are working 200-1000 hours/year at a job that pays ~$12/hour and no benefits besides flight passes why would an RR employee want to pay for a bargaining agent that would likely work to advance the interests of full time permanent employees? Especially for people that like the terms and flexibility RR offers why would they support a union that would work to curb the use of the program?

See above.

On a pedantic note, they can work 300-1300 hrs./yr. There is a sliding scale for dues predicated on base rate(s), and that in the last campaign the initiation fee was to be waived.

Do you know if DL current hires FT/PT for airport operations or do they only promote from within? If so, what determines eligibility for those positions? Do managers select based on performance or is it done strictly by seniority?

All new hiring is done via the RR program. For internal spots, if there are, say, 2 spots in a given station, one is to be offered to a RR. For a transfer w/in the same classification (a ramper moving from, say, ATL to BOS) it's a combo of seniority & performance. If someone wants to move to the counter, a further interview and/or testing is involved. Crew Chief and Red Coat positions are done internally by interview/performance, and not by seniority.

 

[737823]

I mean you take the time to find the "right candidate," instead of the "right now" candidate. The company is the one investing in the employee, but labor also has a vested interest, since we have to work with them.

I've said it before (and Bob Owens touches on it sometimes on the AA board), but on a macro level, a union needs to decide if they want the proverbial 20 people at $10/hr., or 10 at $20/hr.

I understand what you mean. As Bob has also posted, there comes a point when you have given up so much that it’s no longer worth saving the jobs which I agree with to an extent. When people come to work for the airlines they know this industry is unstable and hopefully understand the dynamics of the industry and see that layoffs are more likely here than in other industries.

Yes I do. A big part of that is due to the successful demonization of labor by monied corporate interest, but part of that is because of the devaluation of our labor by "big" labor.

Demonization is a bit extreme, yes there have been reforms and yes the mindset and expectations of workers today is different but I would not go as far to say its demonization. So are you of the belief that the DL-NW merger occurred largely to break heavily unionized NW and merge with largely non-union DL? In April 2008 shortly after the merger that's what an NW agent at DTW told me and it looks like she was right, all the former NW unions have been decertified except the pilots and dispatchers of course.

This is a rough analogy, but on a micro scale, as a crew chief, let's say I need 10 people to do a job safely and efficiently. I won't go with 8, but by the same token won't ask for 13. Does that make sense?

Makes sense. It's entirely conceivable that restrictive union work rules may make it necessary to perform a job with 13+ that could be performed with fewer though.

It's not. Not all unions operate that way, though, and it's something we need to look at changing. I want to labor to be seen as professionals that bring value to the show; not dues whores.

Well if unions are meant to be a professional service and not a dues whore then why is the UAW pursuing graduate teaching assistants at private and public universities coast to coast, why is the IAM pursuing campaigns for janitorial workers? It’s clear the unions are desperate, I'll need to search the archives but back in circa November 2010 the WSJ had a great article on new organization efforts by the UAW including several ill-fated campaigns at the foreign plants in right to work states.

Tough to say. I can tell you that in my experience, RR's generally want the same things anyone else does (fairness, respect, etc.).

On a pedantic note, they can work 300-1300 hrs./yr. There is a sliding scale for dues predicated on base rate(s), and that in the last campaign the initiation fee was to be waived.

All new hiring is done via the RR program. For internal spots, if there are, say, 2 spots in a given station, one is to be offered to a RR. For a transfer w/in the same classification (a ramper moving from, say, ATL to BOS) it's a combo of seniority & performance. If someone wants to move to the counter, a further interview and/or testing is involved. Crew Chief and Red Coat positions are done internally by interview/performance, and not by seniority.

If what Tim said before is true that the IAM encouraged ready reserve at Hawaiian to drum up membership, why did they produce these deceiving videos during the DL election: https://www.youtube....h?v=RB6LMx-lJwA
http://www.takingbackourfamily.com/pdf/rr_blues/ready%20reserve%20blues.pdf
http://www.takingbackourfamily.com/pdf/blue%20notes/BlueNotes6.12.12.pdf

Obviously some will like the idea of joining a union others not as much. As I've said before it seems all the DL employees I have come in contact with are happy, professional, and appear to enjoy their jobs even employees that have identified themselves to me as RRs. I'm not saying injustices and usual workplace politics don't exist at DL but if people were being treated unfairly I'm sure we would hear about it and DL has adequate controls in place to deal with those internal matters.

Kev if all hiring is done through RR isn't that a good thing if you don't like DL's interview and hiring process?

Josh

 

[WorldTraveler]

All new hiring is done via the RR program. For internal spots, if there are, say, 2 spots in a given station, one is to be offered to a RR. For a transfer w/in the same classification (a ramper moving from, say, ATL to BOS) it's a combo of seniority & performance. If someone wants to move to the counter, a further interview and/or testing is involved. Crew Chief and Red Coat positions are done internally by interview/performance, and not by seniority.

DL has long hired into ACS on a part-time or RR basis; even if that may have not been the only way it was done, it was a major way to get into the company.
FAs and pilots can be washed out in training if they don't make it; ground personnel have a probationary period which is used if they are unable to meet performance expectations.
DL has used that process for years.

 

[737823]

Here is an article that may be of interest to you Kev:

As the unions flex muscles, it's a bumpy ride for airlines industry

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]
Read more: As the unions flex muscles, it's a bumpy ride for airlines industry - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/recommended/ci_21611493#ixzz27KS9oWy7
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse[/background]​

[background=rgb(255, 255, 255)]Josh[/background]​