British Airways CEO praises DL, CEO

WorldTraveler said:
so wait, if DL cut a bunch of capacity due to mods but they should be back in compliance this year then they really aren't out of compliance, are they? Uhhhh unless I a missed a ton of capacity added back across the Atlantic....then no. IIRC Delta would have to add like 6 new routes to get back to being somewhat close. That is with some of the extra flying they have added to LON/CDG/AMS.
no one said that DL should be free to make an agreement and then break it but the pilots themselves understand it is because of Alitalia.
again, it has very little to do with AZ. Delta was out of compliance when it was just AF/KL. AZ just dug the hole deeper. 
Since AZ is still in the JV and the fleet mods will be done by this year, then DL either has to be in compliance or pay some type of penalty unless ALPA agrees to waive compliance for something else they believe is more valuable to their members. 
We don't know what they have to do. Its not as simple as they just have to pay,  per the contract they agreed to be at a level of capacity(and its not just capacity. Its a bunch of metrics). They aren't. 
I am not real sure what will happen if it goes to arbitration because it the agreement doesn't have a list of penalties. Hopefully Delta would be forced to add flying back across the Atlantic. 
I don't need to look at the NW network pre-merger.  I can look at the DL network.
I can also look at DL's earnings statements as well as those of every other airline and realize that fuel now costs $3/gal plus - far more than it cost NW or DL or anyone else on a sustained basis.
I am not sure what they has to do with anything....... All the airlines face the same problems. they all pay the same fuel bills. (well, unless your a ME airline...)
No union can force any company to continue to operate where the company can't make money.  They just won't do it.
in a round about way, sure they can. 
For someone who says you understand the business of aviation, it should be no problem recognizing that the union either better agree with the company to some other standard that matches the current state of the business or the company will cut where it needs to, regardless of what the union wants.
really? yikes, I would have thought you would understand how contracts work. No, as much as you want to believe it, Delta simply can't just do what they want. So the Union BETTER do what is best for its members, not for you and the company/investors. The company agreed to a contract. They shouldn't have done so if they didn't plan on honoring it. Now they will have to do something to make up for it. (be it add more flying, or more money, or better work rules etc.) If i were DALPA i would push for more flying. Force Delta to take over more JV flying to balance the network. 
No members, no union. 
I want to see market driven restrictions on mgmt. to protect jobs.  But I can absolutely assure you that comparing a pre-merger network to today and saying "you should be flying that" will never work.  never. in this case yes you can. Delta had a huge network, NW had basically nothing. Much like the Asian networks. (flip flopped) 
sorry WT, you clearly don't get how this works. 
Delta doesn't have to bring back JFK-TXL, but they could very well be forced to take over a few extra flights exCDG/AMS/FCO. 
if you understood me to say anything about reopening old stations, then you misunderstood
DL still balances capacity by its large number of summer seasonal adds which AF and KL do not do as much.
This issue is still a pilot only issue which will be attached to a  whole lot of other issues, including Pacific growth.
These kinds of clauses are precisely why unions usually don't succeed in enforcing them because they don't represent changing strategies... DL's growth focus is in Latin America and Asia. 
And the issue is still related to AZ which is still not sustainable
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

Latest posts