5TH week vacation coming back?
- Thread starter face
- Start date
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
In which case they were offered a termination.
However, only those who have never chosen to move for their own voluntary reasons are in a position to argue that DL was laying them off. The vast majority of airline employees have indeed worked in a city other than where they were first hired including commuting.
DL offered options. The term laid off conveys that there were no options to protect one's job and that was not the case and hasn't been since the merger.
However, only those who have never chosen to move for their own voluntary reasons are in a position to argue that DL was laying them off. The vast majority of airline employees have indeed worked in a city other than where they were first hired including commuting.
DL offered options. The term laid off conveys that there were no options to protect one's job and that was not the case and hasn't been since the merger.
Kev3188
Veteran
Post merger (off the top of my head):
MEM (ACS & CGO)
ANC Airfreight
SEA RES
SUX RES
Sim Techs moved from MSP to ATL
Streak Drivers eliminated in MSP
MSP stock clerk reduction (DTW too?)
That's a key point, and I get it. Trust me; I run into it A LOT.
I have no faith in the people running ACS, nor have they given us any reason to. I'm not alone in that.
As noted earlier in this thread, some people may buy into gauzy buzzwords like "family," or "culture." Those that can critically think know better, recognize that this is a business, and are aware that an equal partnership between capital & labor (much like you enjoy) is the way to go.
I know. But I've seen it, it's happening, and even if it's only a few, it's too many.
(Sidebar to WT to spare this board 5 pages of dickering.
DL told us a few things. First, that they'd take the best of both carriers. Second, that no jobs would be lost as a result of the merger. IMO, they have failed to honor both commitments.
"Jobs lost" to me (and many others) means the position in your current city no longer exists. If you have to move to maintain employment, then you current job is "lost."
Corporate sympathizers see someone chasing the work as a job that has been "kept." I get it. I disagree, and am willing to bet those uprooting their lives would concur.
I will not argue it, nor will I move off that position.)
W/R/T I do not disagree with why MEM is becoming CVG 2.0. What I will continue to point out is how long DL dithered around with vendors, then bringing work back, then losing it, etc. All of that is fixed costs that could've long been offset. Would it have changed things? I doubt it, but at least it would've been much more fiscally (and operationally) sound.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
I appreciate that you don't want to argue and neither do I.
I respect that you say that jobs are lost if one is required to move. However, many airline employees have moved in order to advance their careers. I have a hard time accepting that it is ok for an employee to move around to advance but it isn't ok for the company to tell the employee that they need to move in order to maintain their job.
I don't recall that DL ever said that every full-time employee would always be guaranteed a job in the city in which they worked and in the position in which they worked. If they said that and I missed it, please find it and I will profusely apologize to you.
MEM is past CVG at this point in part because CVG is a larger and more business focused market. The real reason why MEM was spared as long as it was comes down to geography. CVG is directly between ATL and DTW. MEM is west of ATL, far south of MSP, and far east of SLC. MEM partially filled a strategic hole that was the reason for the DFW hub as well. Neither hub generated enough revenue based on the cost and so both were disbanded. The codeshare helped to offset some of it for DL but word was that CO got more from DL in the SE than DL got from CO in the south central area of the US. Just as UA has a hole in their network in the SE and AA/US will have a hole in their network in Asia, DL has a hole in the south central US.
My expectation is that DL will continue to look for opportunities to grow Texas and S. Central markets. DL's presence continues to grow at DFW and MSY. That's a smart but DL is and will be a distant number 4 in the region. It is what it is and I am sure there are minds in ATL trying to figure out how to address it.
In the meantime, it doesn't make sense to fly to places that DL can't make money and DL has made it clear that making money is more important than filling a strategic necessity. Other carriers don't have that same perspective.
Markets could move tomorrow and DL employees could be forced to move again. that is the nature of the airline industry. But for now DL has done the best job of defending its network against competitors which means that sometimes you have to rework your network, move your assets, and concentrate on other markets. And that sometimes means employees have to move as well in order to keep their jobs.
I'm sure "partnership" means a lot of different things to a lot of people but many DL employees consider that having pay including profit sharing and benefits, like PPT, as good as or better than their peers at other airlines is validation that DL is willing to pay at/above average to receive the best service from their employees.
Based on metrics on a number of levels, DL is succeeding at that goal better than DL's peers and their employees in aggregate are supporting them better than many other airline employees.
I respect that you say that jobs are lost if one is required to move. However, many airline employees have moved in order to advance their careers. I have a hard time accepting that it is ok for an employee to move around to advance but it isn't ok for the company to tell the employee that they need to move in order to maintain their job.
I don't recall that DL ever said that every full-time employee would always be guaranteed a job in the city in which they worked and in the position in which they worked. If they said that and I missed it, please find it and I will profusely apologize to you.
MEM is past CVG at this point in part because CVG is a larger and more business focused market. The real reason why MEM was spared as long as it was comes down to geography. CVG is directly between ATL and DTW. MEM is west of ATL, far south of MSP, and far east of SLC. MEM partially filled a strategic hole that was the reason for the DFW hub as well. Neither hub generated enough revenue based on the cost and so both were disbanded. The codeshare helped to offset some of it for DL but word was that CO got more from DL in the SE than DL got from CO in the south central area of the US. Just as UA has a hole in their network in the SE and AA/US will have a hole in their network in Asia, DL has a hole in the south central US.
My expectation is that DL will continue to look for opportunities to grow Texas and S. Central markets. DL's presence continues to grow at DFW and MSY. That's a smart but DL is and will be a distant number 4 in the region. It is what it is and I am sure there are minds in ATL trying to figure out how to address it.
In the meantime, it doesn't make sense to fly to places that DL can't make money and DL has made it clear that making money is more important than filling a strategic necessity. Other carriers don't have that same perspective.
Markets could move tomorrow and DL employees could be forced to move again. that is the nature of the airline industry. But for now DL has done the best job of defending its network against competitors which means that sometimes you have to rework your network, move your assets, and concentrate on other markets. And that sometimes means employees have to move as well in order to keep their jobs.
I'm sure "partnership" means a lot of different things to a lot of people but many DL employees consider that having pay including profit sharing and benefits, like PPT, as good as or better than their peers at other airlines is validation that DL is willing to pay at/above average to receive the best service from their employees.
Based on metrics on a number of levels, DL is succeeding at that goal better than DL's peers and their employees in aggregate are supporting them better than many other airline employees.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
just an add on regarding CVG vs MEM size....
DL/DCI has 108 peak day flights from CVG with more than 7,000 seats/day and the Paris flight still operates on a 763. CVG has a higher percentage of 50 seat aircraft than most other airports of similar size which is supported by the fact that CVG's average fares are high enough to cover the cost of RJ service. While CVG complains about the loss of service, it is the 50 seaters that are keeping CVG's level as high as it is. The high rate of 50 seaters is not just for DL but for most carriers serving CVG.
DL/DCI has 64 peak day flights at MEM with a little over 5,000 seats per day.
DL hasn't given any indication that they intend to reduce service further at either city.
CVG was a larger hub for DL at its peak than was MEM for NW; CVG had as many 5 int'l flights/day. DL's drawdown at CVG took place over a longer period of time than the pulldown of MEM.
DL/DCI has 108 peak day flights from CVG with more than 7,000 seats/day and the Paris flight still operates on a 763. CVG has a higher percentage of 50 seat aircraft than most other airports of similar size which is supported by the fact that CVG's average fares are high enough to cover the cost of RJ service. While CVG complains about the loss of service, it is the 50 seaters that are keeping CVG's level as high as it is. The high rate of 50 seaters is not just for DL but for most carriers serving CVG.
DL/DCI has 64 peak day flights at MEM with a little over 5,000 seats per day.
DL hasn't given any indication that they intend to reduce service further at either city.
CVG was a larger hub for DL at its peak than was MEM for NW; CVG had as many 5 int'l flights/day. DL's drawdown at CVG took place over a longer period of time than the pulldown of MEM.
southwind
Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2008
- Messages
- 7,709
- Reaction score
- 3,928
I remember approx. 11/2 years ago, working OT out the a$$, but don't remember seeing any AMT's rolling their boxes out , at that time and I do not remember stating that while I was working OT, out the a$$, that AMT's were rolling their boxes out...........but nice try anyways !
Maybe you think anti-union peeps are heartless bastards and to be honest, I really don't care, but I'm sure, over the years, a couple of union workers have enjoyed OT, whilst some of their brethren were being escorted off the premises !
And let's face the facts here. Your company could give you 8 weeks vacation, 4 weeks sick leave, paid medical and 50% raise, signed in blood and you wouldn't be happy, unless you were paying dues to a union !
Kev3188
Veteran
...Of course you don't remember. It's hard to see the big picture when you're blinded by dollar signs...
Heartless isn't usually a term that comes to mind. "Low information," and "selfish" do, depending on context.
Speaking of clueless... 🙄
All of the items I listed in post 138 have occurred post merger, so definitely after emergence from BK, and done by DL...
Sorry I wasn't clearer.
Kev3188
Veteran
One would have to work pretty hard to find two more opposite examples than these.
Moving around for either advancement or a change of scenery/dept. is voluntary, and very rarely is other choice hitting the street.
And you are showing your true colors. When I asked why the IAM stood by while UA outsourced MHT this is what you said:
http://www.airlineforums.com/topic/55327-aprilmay-2013-iam-fleet-discussions/page__st__792#entry995604
Either you are a hypocrite, liar, or both but you defend the IAM to a T, insist UA can run their business as they see fit yet blast DL for doing the same. Layoffs/RIFs suck, MEM is becoming an insignificant city for DL, move on, they are growing and hiring in NYC, SEA, and other markets they can be successful in. Give it up, this would happen anytime a company downsizes a location or business unit, union or not.
Josh
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
touché, Josh, touché
Guess all of you cant comprehend.
No where did I criticize DL for laying off, it was to prove to WT, that DL is just like every other airline.
So both of you can go back under your respective bridges.
So glad both of you can infer things from my posts that arent there.
Dont let the facts get in your way.
No where did I criticize DL for laying off, it was to prove to WT, that DL is just like every other airline.
So both of you can go back under your respective bridges.
So glad both of you can infer things from my posts that arent there.
Dont let the facts get in your way.
