Originally Posted by
duece12345
I agree with this. Am I for recovery obligations? Hell no. But I could care less about protecting a good deal for a small number of pilots that should move on anyways. I know, I know. Choices, and that opens up capt seats to jr guys, you can do this too when you are a senior FO, etc. maybe this will creat faster upward movement for the "other" 90% of F/Os. Whether you like it or not, there are quite a few jr FOs that I know of that agree with this.
Great Philosophy. I don't like it and think it is short sighted. I hope your great 3 day trip with a LCA does not turn into a POS red eye. Or a sweet commutable 4 day does not turn into a six day trip because you get "recovered" into a non-commutable trip.
The same philosophy was used by many DAL Pilots around 2000 when we gave away Scope. It went something like this - "We are hiring like crazy, who cares if we allow more RJs - it will only affect a few junior Pilots anyway." We are still paying for that short sighted approach today to some extent.
So guys who live in base should not support any changes that would help commuters. International WB guys should not support any duty rigs that protect the NB guys.
We have this in the contract for a reason. Every thing we have is because it was defended, fought for, and traded for. So why should we give up anything?
Scoop