Impact of FAA furloughs on DL operations
Apr 23, 2013, 3:43 pm
#91
Join Date: Jan 2010
Programs: AA Plat 2MM/UA G MM/DL MM DM 2015/BA Silver/Hyatt Diamond
Posts: 3,103
So, i'm not understanding the commentary on here regarding this being an "administration hissyfit".
Do you think cutting $647M from a ~$15.2B(down from $16B in FY12) budget would have 0 impact? They have to cut that all out of 5 months of budget, which makes things even worse.
I don't get some people.
Do you think cutting $647M from a ~$15.2B(down from $16B in FY12) budget would have 0 impact? They have to cut that all out of 5 months of budget, which makes things even worse.
I don't get some people.
Apr 23, 2013, 3:55 pm
#92
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2008
Programs: Formaldehyde Medallion DL DieMiles
Posts: 12,646
Karma...
DCA is now experiencing OTHER/OTHER delays of 73 minutes average and 140 minutes maximum.
Apr 23, 2013, 4:51 pm
#93
Join Date: May 2009
Location: TPA Bay area
Posts: 485
Thanks for all this info, everyone.
For those of us who have upcoming DL flights and xfers through JFK, combined with scheduled tight connection times, as well as limited flight availability--as an example I have a TPA-JFK-MXP flight next week; 90 minute layover; and the MXP flight is only 1x per 24 hours--should we be contacting DL and trying to reschedule/change flights?
I did try DL Assist a few days ago, saying I would route through MIA or MCO to anywhere in Europe, as I just need to get across the pond, but the DL rep said negatory. So here I am with a 98% chance that I'm going to be stuck in the netherworld of JFK for who knows how long.
In other words, if we can see problems already on the horizon, wouldn't it be better for everyone--meaing, DL and me--to head things off at the pass?
For those of us who have upcoming DL flights and xfers through JFK, combined with scheduled tight connection times, as well as limited flight availability--as an example I have a TPA-JFK-MXP flight next week; 90 minute layover; and the MXP flight is only 1x per 24 hours--should we be contacting DL and trying to reschedule/change flights?
I did try DL Assist a few days ago, saying I would route through MIA or MCO to anywhere in Europe, as I just need to get across the pond, but the DL rep said negatory. So here I am with a 98% chance that I'm going to be stuck in the netherworld of JFK for who knows how long.
In other words, if we can see problems already on the horizon, wouldn't it be better for everyone--meaing, DL and me--to head things off at the pass?
Apr 23, 2013, 5:05 pm
#94
Join Date: Apr 2003
Programs: B6 Mosaic, Bonvoy LT Titanium (x SPG LT), IHG Spire, UA Silver
Posts: 5,848
Thanks for all this info, everyone.
For those of us who have upcoming DL flights and xfers through JFK, combined with scheduled tight connection times, as well as limited flight availability--as an example I have a TPA-JFK-MXP flight next week; 90 minute layover; and the MXP flight is only 1x per 24 hours--should we be contacting DL and trying to reschedule/change flights?
I did try DL Assist a few days ago, saying I would route through MIA or MCO to anywhere in Europe, as I just need to get across the pond, but the DL rep said negatory. So here I am with a 98% chance that I'm going to be stuck in the netherworld of JFK for who knows how long.
In other words, if we can see problems already on the horizon, wouldn't it be better for everyone--meaing, DL and me--to head things off at the pass?
For those of us who have upcoming DL flights and xfers through JFK, combined with scheduled tight connection times, as well as limited flight availability--as an example I have a TPA-JFK-MXP flight next week; 90 minute layover; and the MXP flight is only 1x per 24 hours--should we be contacting DL and trying to reschedule/change flights?
I did try DL Assist a few days ago, saying I would route through MIA or MCO to anywhere in Europe, as I just need to get across the pond, but the DL rep said negatory. So here I am with a 98% chance that I'm going to be stuck in the netherworld of JFK for who knows how long.
In other words, if we can see problems already on the horizon, wouldn't it be better for everyone--meaing, DL and me--to head things off at the pass?
Apr 23, 2013, 5:12 pm
#95
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 81
Thanks for all this info, everyone.
For those of us who have upcoming DL flights and xfers through JFK, combined with scheduled tight connection times, as well as limited flight availability--as an example I have a TPA-JFK-MXP flight next week; 90 minute layover; and the MXP flight is only 1x per 24 hours--should we be contacting DL and trying to reschedule/change flights?
I did try DL Assist a few days ago, saying I would route through MIA or MCO to anywhere in Europe, as I just need to get across the pond, but the DL rep said negatory. So here I am with a 98% chance that I'm going to be stuck in the netherworld of JFK for who knows how long.
In other words, if we can see problems already on the horizon, wouldn't it be better for everyone--meaing, DL and me--to head things off at the pass?
For those of us who have upcoming DL flights and xfers through JFK, combined with scheduled tight connection times, as well as limited flight availability--as an example I have a TPA-JFK-MXP flight next week; 90 minute layover; and the MXP flight is only 1x per 24 hours--should we be contacting DL and trying to reschedule/change flights?
I did try DL Assist a few days ago, saying I would route through MIA or MCO to anywhere in Europe, as I just need to get across the pond, but the DL rep said negatory. So here I am with a 98% chance that I'm going to be stuck in the netherworld of JFK for who knows how long.
In other words, if we can see problems already on the horizon, wouldn't it be better for everyone--meaing, DL and me--to head things off at the pass?
Apr 23, 2013, 5:26 pm
#96
Join Date: Sep 2012
Programs: DL DM, MM
Posts: 2,970
To properly answer this, I'd have to go full-blown OMNI.
Suffice it to say, that there are some of us beyond the Belt-way who have well-deserved skepticism when any federal agency asserts that it can't find 4.25% fat in its budget.
I've been exposed to the process. I have no doubts that, last August, there were folks in the FAA tasked with finding anything that money could be spent on before the end of the fiscal year under the "If we don't spend it all, our next budget request will be cut!" paradigm.
Suffice it to say, that there are some of us beyond the Belt-way who have well-deserved skepticism when any federal agency asserts that it can't find 4.25% fat in its budget.
I've been exposed to the process. I have no doubts that, last August, there were folks in the FAA tasked with finding anything that money could be spent on before the end of the fiscal year under the "If we don't spend it all, our next budget request will be cut!" paradigm.
71.5% of that account goes towards salaries. Are you telling me that if you had to cut 7.2% from your budget you wouldn't touch your 71.5% salary costs?
Looks to me like they did what any other organization or business would do under the situation, and reduced hours by 10%, which would account create a 7.15% cut, pretty much taking care of things.
But please, continue to call it a hissy fit.
The airlines need to shift some of their flights to underutilized airports, and that's going to take time. Also, i'm happy that ATL is unaffected, does anyone know why some airports are more affected than others? Does it come down to the way the ATC is divided? i wouldn't think that ATL is underutilized.
Last edited by StuckOnSegments; Apr 23, 2013 at 5:33 pm
Apr 23, 2013, 5:31 pm
#97
Join Date: Sep 2012
Programs: DL DM, MM
Posts: 2,970
Right, and i'm sure that all the employees make the same amount of money. You comparison is useless without that adjustment.
Apr 23, 2013, 5:31 pm
#98
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Washington, D.C.
Programs: UA Premier 1K: PlAAtinum; DL SM, MM; Marriott Gold; CO Plat Emeritus; NW Plat Emeritus
Posts: 4,776
Maybe your employer can take 25% cuts and maintain functions, but the government isn't remotely that fat (except the Pentagon).
Apr 23, 2013, 5:32 pm
#99
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: BOS
Programs: DL DM 2MM, Marriott LT Titanium, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 15,198
Most of northeast has weather delays due to low ceilings, wind.
DCA is still operating with ground stop delays due to FAA staffing.
DCA is still operating with ground stop delays due to FAA staffing.
Apr 23, 2013, 6:44 pm
#100
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2008
Programs: Formaldehyde Medallion DL DieMiles
Posts: 12,646
I get what you're saying, but its really a 7.2% cut (.637B / (15.2 * (7/12)). In addition, the law requires the cuts to be across the board with regards to accounts, requiring the same percentage cut from each account. Operations is one such account, totaling $9.7B.
71.5% of that account goes towards salaries. Are you telling me that if you had to cut 7.2% from your budget you wouldn't touch your 71.5% salary costs?
Looks to me like they did what any other organization or business would do under the situation, and reduced hours by 10%, which would account create a 7.15% cut, pretty much taking care of things.
But please, continue to call it a hissy fit.
The airlines need to shift some of their flights to underutilized airports, and that's going to take time. Also, i'm happy that ATL is unaffected, does anyone know why some airports are more affected than others? Does it come down to the way the ATC is divided? i wouldn't think that ATL is underutilized.
71.5% of that account goes towards salaries. Are you telling me that if you had to cut 7.2% from your budget you wouldn't touch your 71.5% salary costs?
Looks to me like they did what any other organization or business would do under the situation, and reduced hours by 10%, which would account create a 7.15% cut, pretty much taking care of things.
But please, continue to call it a hissy fit.
The airlines need to shift some of their flights to underutilized airports, and that's going to take time. Also, i'm happy that ATL is unaffected, does anyone know why some airports are more affected than others? Does it come down to the way the ATC is divided? i wouldn't think that ATL is underutilized.
BTW... OMB guidance:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/defa...13/m-13-11.pdf
"As directed by Memorandum 13-03, in allocating reduced budgetary resources due to sequestration, agencies should generally use any available flexibility to reduce operational risks and minimize impacts on the agency's core mission in service of the American people. Agencies should also take into account funding flexibilities, including the availability of reprogramming and transfer authority."
Apr 23, 2013, 6:48 pm
#101
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Anywhere I need to be.
Programs: OW Emerald, *A Gold, NEXUS, GE, ABTC/APEC, South Korea SES, eIACS, PP, Hyatt Diamond
Posts: 16,046
I get what you're saying, but its really a 7.2% cut (.637B / (15.2 * (7/12)). In addition, the law requires the cuts to be across the board with regards to accounts, requiring the same percentage cut from each account. Operations is one such account, totaling $9.7B.
71.5% of that account goes towards salaries. Are you telling me that if you had to cut 7.2% from your budget you wouldn't touch your 71.5% salary costs?
Looks to me like they did what any other organization or business would do under the situation, and reduced hours by 10%, which would account create a 7.15% cut, pretty much taking care of things.
But please, continue to call it a hissy fit.
The airlines need to shift some of their flights to underutilized airports, and that's going to take time. Also, i'm happy that ATL is unaffected, does anyone know why some airports are more affected than others? Does it come down to the way the ATC is divided? i wouldn't think that ATL is underutilized.
71.5% of that account goes towards salaries. Are you telling me that if you had to cut 7.2% from your budget you wouldn't touch your 71.5% salary costs?
Looks to me like they did what any other organization or business would do under the situation, and reduced hours by 10%, which would account create a 7.15% cut, pretty much taking care of things.
But please, continue to call it a hissy fit.
The airlines need to shift some of their flights to underutilized airports, and that's going to take time. Also, i'm happy that ATL is unaffected, does anyone know why some airports are more affected than others? Does it come down to the way the ATC is divided? i wouldn't think that ATL is underutilized.
As well, they would command higher fares which would make people stay away from those airports.
Apr 23, 2013, 11:01 pm
#102
Join Date: Sep 2012
Programs: DL DM, MM
Posts: 2,970
Actually, I suspect the hissy fit foot stamping is occurring at a higher level. FAA folks are just obeying orders.
BTW... OMB guidance:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/defa...13/m-13-11.pdf
"As directed by Memorandum 13-03, in allocating reduced budgetary resources due to sequestration, agencies should generally use any available flexibility to reduce operational risks and minimize impacts on the agency's core mission in service of the American people. Agencies should also take into account funding flexibilities, including the availability of reprogramming and transfer authority."
BTW... OMB guidance:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/defa...13/m-13-11.pdf
"As directed by Memorandum 13-03, in allocating reduced budgetary resources due to sequestration, agencies should generally use any available flexibility to reduce operational risks and minimize impacts on the agency's core mission in service of the American people. Agencies should also take into account funding flexibilities, including the availability of reprogramming and transfer authority."
reduce spending. All non-exempt budget accounts in a given spending category must be reduced
by a uniform percentage, and the same percentage reduction must be applied to all programs,
projects, and activities (PPAs) within a budget account. However, depending on an agency's
account structure and any existing flexibilities provided by law, some agencies may have a
limited ability to realign funds to protect mission priorities."
Unless you can prove the FAA might be one of these agencies with a limited ability to do so. Until then, you're just making unfounded innuendo and removing context from quotes. In addition, the hissy fit throwing administration issued this memo, so you're even further weakening your point.
Apr 23, 2013, 11:06 pm
#103
Join Date: Sep 2012
Programs: DL DM, MM
Posts: 2,970
You're misunderstanding me or i was unclear. I'm saying the airlines should direct more traffic and thus "hub" more flights through underutilized airports.
Apr 24, 2013, 6:04 am
#104
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Atlanta,Georgia
Programs: Delta, Starwood, Delta DM
Posts: 336
We are flying ATL-CDG-LIS in 3 weeks with a 90 minute connection in CDG....I'm worried about making our CDG connection to Lisbon. Atlanta news stations state an average 2-3 hr delay in flights out of ATL.??
Apr 24, 2013, 6:32 am
#105
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Full time Nomad
Posts: 842
Best site for delay monitoring?
I saved this site:
http://www.fly.faa.gov/ois/
from an earlier post. Is this the best to use to see affected airports and delay times?
Are there any others that are helpful that you would recommend?
Thanks
http://www.fly.faa.gov/ois/
from an earlier post. Is this the best to use to see affected airports and delay times?
Are there any others that are helpful that you would recommend?
Thanks