Originally Posted by
Bandit524
Let’s see if I’ve got this straight. Our collective union says disputed pairings are onerous and are potentially detrimental to safety. Without published supporting rationale we’re supposed to blindly follow their guidance. In the meantime, our least experienced crews are forced to fly these same pairings. Wow, there’s an original safety thought for you! This is all from the same union that promised the moon with respect to analytical contract advice but missed the boat on numerous issues (all discussed previously in this forum), sold us down the river with respect to the FDA, and ignored the majority on age 65. I for one am done with blindly following union recommendations and will assess DPs based upon my own evaluation of the pairing in question. I quite sure there are numerous others that feel likewise. I’m not trying to start a war here and I respect how strongly you guys feel but I’ve felt the need to say this for some time. Maybe you folks can convince me that I’m wrong but my trust in our union is currently deeply in the red.
Lame excuse to rationalize picking up that juicy double deadhead sandwiched around a disputed sequence! You'd be no different than the nonmember that says "Its not about the money..."