Originally Posted by
Grumble
What if its the worst, all night flying that goes to the bottom anyway? Then how would you feel?
Does the company moving flying from one base to another not already abrogate seniority? Who is the special interest if they open a VB in say LAS and MCO? Can not everyone bid for it?
Not making a case for VB, and I can't see how to make it work without causing huge problems, but a lot of the arguments guys make based on a hypothetical seem just as implausible.
Well there's the rub huh?
As pilots we don't have a contractual mandate to influence the company's allocation of flying systemwide or between hubs. The SSC can offer input and make suggestions but beyond that, the company flys where they want.
We do however have very specific language that addresses how that flying is staffed. It's worth studying the history of how and why that specific language evolved.
The company loves the idea of a VB if they can bypass the "expensive" process of opening a new pilot domicile. Pilots living in VB city would obviously love to shed the commute, no doubt! But, if ALPA agrees to VB, all new bases will be VB and in the long run we screw ourselves.
As an aside, reading this thread there's an apparent disconnect between "allocation of flying" and "staffing of flying". To have an informed conversation it's really important to know the difference.