When to take long term Mil leave
#51
I’ve always found the hypocrisy entertaining. Airline pilots hating other airline pilots for being able to game the system better. It seems mil leave is no worse than bidding a bunch of lines, only to drop them so that you can pick up time and a half pay over someone else, or just not work at all. You are still gaming the system in your favor to maximize pay or to benefit you in some way
Who complains about being able to drop your line to pickup?
I can see straight pickup of extra time with guys on furlough being ethically questionable but not what you’re describing.
#52
New Hire
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: A-10
Posts: 8
Tell me, if you had the opportunity to get a seniority number and make 50-60k more than first year airline pay, plus spend more time at home with your family (vs sitting in a hotel room at a domicile away from home) - would you do it?
Or are you, 'cocktimusprime', such the company man - that you're going to tell your wife you're going to forfeit 50-60k that year plus time at home with her and the kids because you think it's the right thing to do?
Edit:
I'd like to caveat that in the above (former) example you'd continue to serve your country and work your ass off at your military squadron. You'd be flying a lot, and most likely have at least two extra jobs at your squadron outside of flying. For instance, creating the flying schedule each day and PROJO'ing an upcoming TDY. Not just sitting around in the vault. All completely allowable per USERRA law, btw.
#53
On Reserve
Joined APC: Dec 2018
Posts: 17
They are "crapping" on everyone, regardless of background who actually intends to work for the job they applied for. Embedded military management has a soft spot for and preferential hiring for military pilots(50%!). Every other applicant, again, regardless of background, may be being overlooked to hire a pilot who has little to no intention of working for AA until they receive their military retirement. I get it, it's legal, you're my hero and "protected." Simply calling the practice OUT.
#55
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2017
Position: 175 CA
Posts: 1,285
Part of TWA's demise was a ton of employees on the books that never worked. 1 out of 4 if I remember correctly. AA isn't a government agency; it can run out of money, it can go bankrupt, everyone can lose their jobs, we must turn a profit to exist. A few of us have fairly vivid experiences of bankruptcies turning careers sour. If you want to flagrantly jeopardize that for your own selfish benefit then yes, you're putting everyone at risk.
#56
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,088
SWA also forcibly pairs military pilots with prior 121 hires because they don't know what they're doing in training.
Part of TWA's demise was a ton of employees on the books that never worked. 1 out of 4 if I remember correctly. AA isn't a government agency; it can run out of money, it can go bankrupt, everyone can lose their jobs, we must turn a profit to exist. A few of us have fairly vivid experiences of bankruptcies turning careers sour. If you want to flagrantly jeopardize that for your own selfish benefit then yes, you're putting everyone at risk.
Part of TWA's demise was a ton of employees on the books that never worked. 1 out of 4 if I remember correctly. AA isn't a government agency; it can run out of money, it can go bankrupt, everyone can lose their jobs, we must turn a profit to exist. A few of us have fairly vivid experiences of bankruptcies turning careers sour. If you want to flagrantly jeopardize that for your own selfish benefit then yes, you're putting everyone at risk.
I mean I get it, it's kinda a dick move, but the company hasn't really indicated it has an issue with it.
You'd think you'd see the same prejudices at other carriers if it was an issue, especially at a place like SWA.
#58
#60
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2017
Position: 175 CA
Posts: 1,285
I don't really see how "employing" someone who isn't getting paid is the same as paying people to not work though.
I mean I get it, it's kinda a dick move, but the company hasn't really indicated it has an issue with it.
You'd think you'd see the same prejudices at other carriers if it was an issue, especially at a place like SWA.
I mean I get it, it's kinda a dick move, but the company hasn't really indicated it has an issue with it.
You'd think you'd see the same prejudices at other carriers if it was an issue, especially at a place like SWA.
The 'company' aka flight ops management doesn't have a problem with it because they come from the same background and view this as a flying club.
They never feel the heat of our shoddy financial performance until it comes time to hand out furlough notices, and even then the status quo is untouchable.
As a whole this is the systematic attitude problem that plagues this airline and sets it apart from companies like Southwest/Delta.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post