Interesting news. Delta has decided to insource the below wing (ramp) operations in RDU and AUS. This will create over 100 full time positions between the two cities. Article here:https://news.delta.com/delta-insources-100-full-time-jobs-airport-ramp-operations-austin-and-raleigh-durham

I suppose this means that flights will be added to AUS if they plan on making it 1 of the 2 largest non-hub stations. MCO is already a large non-hub city and I'm guessing BOS will be labeled a hub?

The article says "two of the airline's largest non-Hub stations," meaning they will be (and already are) among the top non-hub spokes, but where does it say they will be #1/2?

BDL757 wrote:

Interesting news. Delta has decided to insource the below wing (ramp) operations in RDU and AUS. This will create over 100 full time positions between the two cities. Article here:https://news.delta.com/delta-insources-100-full-time-jobs-airport-ramp-operations-austin-and-raleigh-durham

I suppose this means that flights will be added to AUS if they plan on making it 1 of the 2 largest non-hub stations. MCO is already a large non-hub city and I'm guessing BOS will be labeled a hub?

Great news (because DGS has a ton of turnover), but if you read carefully it says: "Two of DL's largest non-hubs". Doesn't say that RDU or AUS are the top two, just that they're near the top.

Around the turn of the millennium, DL planned to have BOS become a full hub. At least that's what I was told in training. And then of course times changed dramatically after 9/11.

flyfresno wrote:

The article says "two of the airline's largest non-Hub stations," meaning they will be (and already are) among the top non-hub spokes, but where does it say they will be #1/2?

Good point, you are correct about this article. I reread the article posted internally and it does indeed say will become the largest non-hub cities. So there seems to be a quote that's in the internal article that isn't in the external one.

This is a non-story (aside from insourcing labor), but here comes the AUS crowd...

Unless the OP can provide another source, the threat title should be changed -- it's inaccurate.

RDUDDJI wrote:

Around the turn of the millennium, DL planned to have BOS become a full hub. At least that's what I was told in training. And then of course times changed dramatically after 9/11.

Hence the construction of the large, modern terminal A, with DL initially as its only tenant.

Things seem to be coming full circle now though, as DL will soon again have all of A, and they continue to grow in BOS.

TPA is a much larger outstation that AUS, so is FLL and MCO, among others. I wonder what the plans are for AUS if they plan on becoming the largest spoke with RDU.

Does this mean Delta will add international flights to ICN, LHR, AMS, CDG, YYZ, MEX, BCN, FCO, and HEL from AUS...since it's a huge tech hub of course, and because it's Austin.

Non-story. They're simply transitioning from outsourced to employing their own people in RDU and AUS.

flyoregon wrote:

Non-story. They're simply transitioning from outsourced to employing their own people in RDU and AUS.

LOL. Tough crowd! I think it's noteworthy (and good news) to add that many full time positions when I remember years ago during the "bad times" we were outsourcing many above and below wing stations in addition to adding mostly part time non-benefited jobs. AUS going from 20ish departures to one of the two largest stations in the system seems like a story to me. to each his own I guess.

Some people on this forum also consider DTW to be a DL non-hub...

There is no question they are trying to grow AUS. But they have no point of sale at AUS at all. It will be a long uphill battle if they tried.

BDL757 wrote:

flyoregon wrote:

Non-story. They're simply transitioning from outsourced to employing their own people in RDU and AUS.

LOL. Tough crowd! I think it's noteworthy (and good news) to add that many full time positions when I remember years ago during the "bad times" we were outsourcing many above and below wing stations in addition to adding mostly part time non-benefited jobs. AUS going from 20ish departures to one of the two largest stations in the system seems like a story to me. to each his own I guess.

The disconnect is that the PR does -not- say that AUS is going to be one of the two largest stations in the system.

HVNandrew wrote:

RDUDDJI wrote:

Around the turn of the millennium, DL planned to have BOS become a full hub. At least that's what I was told in training. And then of course times changed dramatically after 9/11.

Hence the construction of the large, modern terminal A, with DL initially as its only tenant.

Things seem to be coming full circle now though, as DL will soon again have all of A, and they continue to grow in BOS.

Interesting. Where will WN go when Delta claims all of A?

avi8 wrote:

TPA is a much larger outstation that AUS, so is FLL and MCO, among others. I wonder what the plans are for AUS if they plan on becoming the largest spoke with RDU.

Larger than Orlando ?!?

axiom wrote:

BDL757 wrote:

flyoregon wrote:

Non-story. They're simply transitioning from outsourced to employing their own people in RDU and AUS.

LOL. Tough crowd! I think it's noteworthy (and good news) to add that many full time positions when I remember years ago during the "bad times" we were outsourcing many above and below wing stations in addition to adding mostly part time non-benefited jobs. AUS going from 20ish departures to one of the two largest stations in the system seems like a story to me. to each his own I guess.

The disconnect is that the PR does -not- say that AUS is going to be one of the two largest stations in the system.

I was just about to say that, all the press release says is that AUS is one of DLs largest non-hub stations. It doesn’t even use a reference point to determine how meaningful that statement is.

I would suggest changing the title of the thread

Its about time they cut the outsourcing at RDU. Serving 20 destination with multiple frequencies daily on many should have been done a long time ago. Does this reflect that AUS might catch up to the same markets served from RDU such as FLL, TPA, MCO?

mbmbos wrote:

HVNandrew wrote:

RDUDDJI wrote:

Around the turn of the millennium, DL planned to have BOS become a full hub. At least that's what I was told in training. And then of course times changed dramatically after 9/11.

Hence the construction of the large, modern terminal A, with DL initially as its only tenant.

Things seem to be coming full circle now though, as DL will soon again have all of A, and they continue to grow in BOS.

Interesting. Where will WN go when Delta claims all of A?

They are moving to B in late 2019. Massport is moving and consolidating AA into a single pier, adding two gates on the UA side and WN will have 5 gates once it all comes together. DL will have all the gates in A except for A1/2 which it will share with WS

VS4ever wrote:

mbmbos wrote:

HVNandrew wrote:

Hence the construction of the large, modern terminal A, with DL initially as its only tenant.

Things seem to be coming full circle now though, as DL will soon again have all of A, and they continue to grow in BOS.

Interesting. Where will WN go when Delta claims all of A?

They are moving to B in late 2019. Massport is moving and consolidating AA into a single pier, adding two gates on the UA side and WN will have 5 gates once it all comes together. DL will have all the gates in A except for A1/2 which it will share with WS

I think this will work out better for Southwest anyway. Thank you for the answer!

- MBM

For all the naysayers here, I would pay close attention to BDL757's post about the internal memo. Looks like AUS, and to a lesser extent RDU, are about to see a lot more Delta flights. Stay tuned.

TransWorldOne wrote:

For all the naysayers here, I would pay close attention to BDL757's post about the internal memo. Looks like AUS, and to a lesser extent RDU, are about to see a lot more Delta flights. Stay tuned.

They missed that part about the internal memo with their rush to row or berate....but should be interesting to see what exactly Delta comes up with to grow Aus & Rdu significantly

Wait Wait Wait Wait...

What I read was:
* DL is changing some outsourced under wing positions to Delta employees
* Those positions are at RDU and AUS and will equal about 100 positions changed positions
* It will be split between the two, meaning some AUS and some RDU but since RDU is a larger operation I’m assuming it will be more there
* AUS and RDU are two OF their largest stations (but are NOT their two largest stations)

Is this what anybody else got?

Totally agree that the topic title is misleading. Nothing in the article suggests anything about growth in operations or being the "top two largest stations." And even if there is an internal document with that phrase, the way DL defines hubs/focus cities is totally nebulous.

That being said, it would be interesting if someone could provide a list of stations where DL has in-sourced ground operations to see how AUS and RDU compare.

TropicalSky wrote:

TransWorldOne wrote:

For all the naysayers here, I would pay close attention to BDL757's post about the internal memo. Looks like AUS, and to a lesser extent RDU, are about to see a lot more Delta flights. Stay tuned.

They missed that part about the internal memo with their rush to row or berate....but should be interesting to see what exactly Delta comes up with to grow Aus & Rdu significantly

How can you miss something that hasnt been shared?

If there is proof I would love to see it, but the constant unbacked rumor mill from the AUS crowd gets old

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to cause such a stir. Usually the article on news.delta is the same exact internal article so I didn't check the link. Someone can change the title or delete it if they want.

Interestingly, though, if you go to news.delta.com and put your cursor on the story (but don't click it) a little preview comes up and says "with these changes, Austin and Raleigh are set to become the two largest non-hub stations in the system". This is what is in the article on deltanet but missing from the public story.

BDL757 wrote:

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to cause such a stir. Usually the article on news.delta is the same exact internal article so I didn't check the link. Someone can change the title or delete it if they want.

Interestingly, though, if you go to news.delta.com and put your cursor on the story (but don't click it) a little preview comes up and says "with these changes, Austin and Raleigh are set to become the two largest non-hub stations in the system". This is what is in the article on deltanet but missing from the public story.

Don’t apologize. This is a.net.....people complain just to be able to make a post. Like people are really debating the thread title and complaining about it being misleading ? Who gives a crap - scroll on.


Thanks for posting.

Now, I’m taking my own advice...

Remember its long been rumored that DL was planning on growing in AUS... I'm really curious as to why DL decided to drop their own contractor.

ERJ170 wrote:

Wait Wait Wait Wait...

What I read was:
* DL is changing some outsourced under wing positions to Delta employees
* Those positions are at RDU and AUS and will equal about 100 positions changed positions
* It will be split between the two, meaning some AUS and some RDU but since RDU is a larger operation I’m assuming it will be more there
* AUS and RDU are two OF their largest stations (but are NOT their two largest stations)

Is this what anybody else got?

That's exactly how it read to me too. But that still bears the question why is Delta making such a big deal about these two stations as I'm they have done this at other out stations under the radar. Is this to boost employee moral or is there something really in the works for Delta in Austin. It's really hard to tell because Delta is such a propaganda machine we sometimes don't know what their true agenda might be.

klm617 wrote:

It's really hard to tell because Delta is such a propaganda machine we sometimes don't know what their true agenda might be.

AVLAirlineFreq wrote:

Some people on this forum also consider DTW to be a DL non-hub...

How do I "like" this a million times?

tphuang wrote:

There is no question they are trying to grow AUS. But they have no point of sale at AUS at all. It will be a long uphill battle if they tried.

Except all the people buying their tickets and filling their flights. Sorry that's not enough point of sale for you, but DL seems content in their growth and success in AUS. Wanna talk about a carrier that has historically struggled in austin than B6 is your guy. IIRC they have cut destinations and frequencies and abandoned their plans for a mini focus city.

TropicalSky wrote:

TransWorldOne wrote:

For all the naysayers here, I would pay close attention to BDL757's post about the internal memo. Looks like AUS, and to a lesser extent RDU, are about to see a lot more Delta flights. Stay tuned.

They missed that part about the internal memo with their rush to row or berate....but should be interesting to see what exactly Delta comes up with to grow Aus & Rdu significantly

This forum is for factual discussion of civi aviation. It literally says that on the webpage.

Until then, this should say rumour. Period. This doesn't mean that I want a row or to berate. I come to this forum to have factual discussions about civil aviation.

klm617 wrote:

ERJ170 wrote:

Wait Wait Wait Wait...

What I read was:
* DL is changing some outsourced under wing positions to Delta employees
* Those positions are at RDU and AUS and will equal about 100 positions changed positions
* It will be split between the two, meaning some AUS and some RDU but since RDU is a larger operation I’m assuming it will be more there
* AUS and RDU are two OF their largest stations (but are NOT their two largest stations)

Is this what anybody else got?

That's exactly how it read to me too. But that still bears the question why is Delta making such a big deal about these two stations as I'm they have done this at other out stations under the radar. Is this to boost employee moral or is there something really in the works for Delta in Austin. It's really hard to tell because Delta is such a propaganda machine we sometimes don't know what their true agenda might be.

The idea that Delta might bust out a bigger-than-MCO operation at both RDU and AUS is entirely possible. It's big news if true. But we don't have real evidence in this thread that it is true. Delta PR is not a source I trust unless it is clearly researched and legally binding. Which material statements from executives are.

AUS only has 20-30 flights or something, how can they be one of the largest outstations?

That said, it would be smart for DL to build up AUS to a focus city, considering they (and SkyTeam in general) have a big hole in Texas, a rapidly growing state/market.

MIflyer12 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

There is no question they are trying to grow AUS. But they have no point of sale at AUS at all. It will be a long uphill battle if they tried.

How do you know that?

Based on their yield out of aus on routes where they don’t dominate on the other end like sea bos and lax.

klm617 wrote:

ERJ170 wrote:

Wait Wait Wait Wait...

What I read was:
* DL is changing some outsourced under wing positions to Delta employees
* Those positions are at RDU and AUS and will equal about 100 positions changed positions
* It will be split between the two, meaning some AUS and some RDU but since RDU is a larger operation I’m assuming it will be more there
* AUS and RDU are two OF their largest stations (but are NOT their two largest stations)

Is this what anybody else got?

That's exactly how it read to me too. But that still bears the question why is Delta making such a big deal about these two stations as I'm they have done this at other out stations under the radar. Is this to boost employee moral or is there something really in the works for Delta in Austin. It's really hard to tell because Delta is such a propaganda machine we sometimes don't know what their true agenda might be.

*EVERY* major corporation in the U.S. has these cute little things called a corporate communications team, with multiple people assigned to roles covering external, internal, investor, and executive communications. This isn't a "propaganda machine," this is called employee engagement.


Not that you know what you're talking about, but keep rambling on. It's funny.

Fargo wrote:

AUS only has 20-30 flights or something, how can they be one of the largest outstations?

Most of the flights are mainline, and due to its distance from most hubs it makes sense to use mainline aircraft

Flighty wrote:

The idea that Delta might bust out a bigger-than-MCO operation at both RDU and AUS is entirely possible. It's big news if true. But we don't have real evidence in this thread that it is true. Delta PR is not a source I trust unless it is clearly researched and legally binding. Which material statements from executives are.

RDU and AUS aren't on the same plane, RDU has 80 daily flights AUS has around 25....

RDU is already an MCO operation

tphuang wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

There is no question they are trying to grow AUS. But they have no point of sale at AUS at all. It will be a long uphill battle if they tried.

How do you know that?

Based on their yield out of aus on routes where they don’t dominate on the other end like sea bos and lax.

It's interesting how you keep posting all this information about financial performance based on your perceived yield of routes, yet a number of people keep coming on here right behind you posting that you're completely clueless as to what you are talking about in regards to this. Ever notice that? Because, I do.

MCO is the largest DL station by number of DL employees that is not labeled a hub or focus city.

You can connect on VS and DL, sometimes even AM to MEX and if you want to get creative, on parts to Canada with WS. I think at this point, MCO should be labeled. As the Delta CEO told MCO employees, MCO is at the "cusp" of being a Delta hub and will grow in the coming years.

stlgph wrote:

tphuang wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

How do you know that?

Based on their yield out of aus on routes where they don’t dominate on the other end like sea bos and lax.

It's interesting how you keep posting all this information about financial performance based on your perceived yield of routes, yet a number of people keep coming on here right behind you posting that you're completely clueless as to what you are talking about in regards to this. Ever notice that? Because, I do.

Thanks for paying so much attention to me.

I have received a lot of good feedback and some negative ones. In the end of the day, if others have different numbers than what I have, I would love to see them. Being an avgeek, I like any kind of information I can access.

But if they disagree with me just because they don’t like me saying their airline is not doing as well in certain areas, Then it’s their loss. The number here simply says delta does not do well out of aus on routes where they don’t dominate the other hand. Is that really such a surprise when considering the size of wn and aa in Texas?

stlgph wrote:

tphuang wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

How do you know that?

Based on their yield out of aus on routes where they don’t dominate on the other end like sea bos and lax.

It's interesting how you keep posting all this information about financial performance based on your perceived yield of routes, yet a number of people keep coming on here right behind you posting that you're completely clueless as to what you are talking about in regards to this. Ever notice that? Because, I do.

Do you have numbers that show that tphuang is incorrect? Because I have average fares that show he's pretty much in line. We call this real data, not perceptions.

Q2 2018 Average Fare / Yield, US DOT Net Fare Bands

AUSLAX:
UA: $169, $0.136
AA: $164, $0.132
DL: $156, $0.126
WN: $120, $0.097

AUSBOS:
AA: $222, $0.131
UA: $217, $0.128
B6: $202, $0.119
DL: $184, $0.108
WN: $159, $0.094

BDL757 wrote:

Interesting news. Delta has decided to insource the below wing (ramp) operations in RDU and AUS. This will create over 100 full time positions between the two cities. Article here:https://news.delta.com/delta-insources-100-full-time-jobs-airport-ramp-operations-austin-and-raleigh-durham

I suppose this means that flights will be added to AUS if they plan on making it 1 of the 2 largest non-hub stations. MCO is already a large non-hub city and I'm guessing BOS will be labeled a hub?

100 full-time jobs between two airports is not that many, considering it's 2 to 3 shifts per day for 7 days a week... WN employs 286 ground employees in AUS for 6 gates that serve approximately 70 daily flights.

I'd love a direct DL flight from RDU to SYR.

Per an article from The News and Observer, RDU will get 70 DGS to DL positions below wing plus ready reserve... so AUS will get 30 DGS to DL below wing positions. Not sure how many RDU positions are already there..

And I don’t know how many more flights DL can add without F9 and G4 moving or the new extensions added

ERJ170 wrote:

Per an article from The News and Observer, RDU will get 70 DGS to DL positions below wing plus ready reserve... so AUS will get 30 DGS to DL below wing positions. Not sure how many RDU positions are already there..

And I don’t know how many more flights DL can add without F9 and G4 moving or the new extensions added

I thought RDU used all CUTE gates. So I don't think it really matters as long as there's a gate available somewhere at the time of the new flights.

about time RDU and AUS went to in-house operations. Hopefully stations like MIA, SAN and a few others will be next.

When it comes to mainline Delta even doubling activity would only put them at #12 and #13 behind Las Vegas. These are 2017 numbers I pulled together awhile back of the 50 busiest Delta mainline stations. These numbers are average weekly departures.

01 … 5158.6 ….. ATL
02 … 1384.8 ….. MSP
03 … 1203.5 ….. DTW
04 ….. 881.9 ….. SLC
05 ….. 844.6 ….. JFK
06 ….. 694.3 ….. LAX
07 ….. 464.1 ….. SEA
08 ….. 446.7 ….. LGA
09 ….. 350.4 ….. MCO
10 ….. 342.8 ….. BOS
11 ….. 252.5 ….. LAS
12 ….. 229.5 ….. SFO
13 ….. 218.1 ….. TPA
14 ….. 212.3 ….. FLL
15 ….. 194.8 ….. DEN
16 ….. 194.3 ….. MIA
17 ….. 171.7 ….. DCA
18 ….. 155.2 ….. PDX
19 ….. 150.8 ….. ORD
20 ….. 148.4 ….. CVG
21 ….. 144.3 ….. PHX
22 ….. 142.1 ….. MSY
23 ….. 141.0 ….. PHL
24 ….. 138.9 ….. BWI
25 ….. 135.4 ….. SAN
26 ….. 126.5 ….. MCI
27 ….. 125.7 ….. RDU
28 ….. 124.5 ….. AUS
29 ….. 119.9 ….. PBI
30 ….. 118.9 ….. EWR
31 ….. 117.8 ….. BNA
32 ….. 115.9 ….. CLT
33 ….. 111.7 ….. AMS
34 ….. 108.5 ….. DFW
35 ….. 108.4 ….. RSW
36 ….. 107.2 ….. CUN
37 ….. 102.2 ….. MKE
38 ……. 99.5 ….. IND
39 ……. 95.0 ….. STL
40 ……. 88.9 ….. HNL
41 ……. 88.7 ….. MEM
42 ……. 87.5 ….. JAX
43 ……. 83.4 ….. BDL
44 ……. 78.6 ….. PIT
45 ……. 78.1 ….. SJC
46 ……. 75.9 ….. LHR
47 ……. 75.8 ….. CDG
48 ……. 74.8 ….. CHS
49 ……. 74.6 ….. SAT
50 ……. 74.6 ….. GRR

Now of course these are mainline only and don't include DL*, a much more difficult number to get from this data source because most regionals have multiple masters. And it's DL* which really lets RDU shoot up the list of busiest non-hub Delta stations. However I don't see AUS replicating that because of geography, competition and the nature of the market. A great deal of Austin's boom has led to mushrooming traffic to big, mostly coastal destinations. It hasn't brought exploding high-fare business demand to RJ-suited markets in the region like Tulsa, El Paso, Little Rock, Albuquerque, Lubbock, Wichita, etc. Not to say there couldn't be some RJ adds such as E75 to Chicago. But for Delta to grow Austin to anywhere near the daily flights RDU see is not an easy path.

cessna2 wrote:

All I’m going to say is DL is adding more management to RDU. Types of positions that don’t exist outside of large stations or mini hubs. I do believe DL has more plans for RDU than people are willing to admit.

Could be a cost saving measure more than flights, but moving labor. In 2018 and technology there's alot of jobs that don't have to be in Atlanta. They could get some nice incentives to move a few departments or found some way those positions are cheaper operating in the RDU area. It could be more than flights could be labor savings. RDU is clearly a focus city for Delta but also nice and close to ATL, seems possible. I would take these jobs rumor as RDU is in for the long term more which is good news, clearly will continue to be a focus city, but doesn't mean they have to make it a hub.

slcdeltarumd11 wrote:

cessna2 wrote:

All I’m going to say is DL is adding more management to RDU. Types of positions that don’t exist outside of large stations or mini hubs. I do believe DL has more plans for RDU than people are willing to admit.

Could be a cost saving measure more than flights, but moving labor. In 2018 and technology there's alot of jobs that don't have to be in Atlanta. They could get some nice incentives to move a few departments or found some way those positions are cheaper operating in the RDU area. It could be more than flights could be labor savings. RDU is clearly a focus city for Delta but also nice and close to ATL, seems possible. I would take these jobs rumor as RDU is in for the long term more which is good news, clearly will continue to be a focus city, but doesn't mean they have to make it a hub.

Sorry, but you don't move management functions outside of the consolidated mother ship to cut costs. We're not talking IT or call centers here. Also, they're not just rumors. Delta have added both a Sales General Manager and a team of account executives to RDU in the past couple of months. You don't do that unless it's going to be a notable focus city where you want to have corporate account facing boots on the ground.