Thread: 23.M.7 Updated
View Single Post
Old 07-02-2023 | 09:38 AM
  #154  
crewdawg's Avatar
crewdawg
Moderator
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,342
Likes: 347
Default

Originally Posted by Wolf424
Unpopular opinion: I’m starting to think those most upset about this change likely fall into 1 of 2 groups:

1. Those cutting side deals with scheduling or volunteering for reroutes

2. Those upset they won’t get paid as the “affected pilot” due to 23M7

This is based off of conversations I’ve had with some fellow pilots in the Van.

Fire away.

Fire away.

Counter point, I've only flown 1 GS in months and I believe I've only ever received 1 payment from a 23.M.7 violation (I think) and the violation was called out by someone else. I had no idea where it came from or why I got it until I asked around. I don't have the time, or will, to sit and do forensics on assignments.

I don't really care about the batch sizes themselves. I only care that we really didnt get anything of substance. To me, them promising to only violate the spirit of 23.M.7 (by "their" interpretation) within 8 hours is just not a win. I think I've received more IA calls in the last two days, than I have in the last 2 years on this fleet. We negotiated for batch sizes for a good reason, then we just gave it up for a promise. Something as simple as a more user friendly system to input GS requests to make it to build/layer GS requests. Another win would have been an easy slider or something to turn on/off GS requests, rather than having to delete GS requests and input them again later. This would help both parties.
Reply