15 hrs for redeyes, LUS east?
08-16-2015, 12:47 AM
#11
Banned
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: A330
Posts: 1,043
Originally Posted by Arado 234
I haven't been on C&R for a while. I heard it quiet down. Are more pilots taking their meds? 
Originally Posted by aa73
I'm not sure what type of trip you guys are talking about. It really depends on the trip. We have red eyes that are part of 2, 3 and 4 day trips that are built to 10, 15 and 20hrs or more. If you are talking about the LAX-Hawaii trips (1 daytime out, 1 red eye back) they are blocked around 11 and change (compared to delta and ual who get 15+.) but we also have 3 day trips with 24hrs off in the middle that are also blocked at 15+. Like I said it just depends on the trip.
08-16-2015, 05:47 AM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 220
Originally Posted by drinksonme
Really what base? In CLT they are all in open time everyday and mainly all the reserves are flying them. Well at least FO side. All I've flown in my last 12, yes 12 trips, are 3 day red eyes and all nighters.
CA might be a different story, but I've only had a few that actually picked it up. And that was usually so they could move a day cause they had something where they need a day off, not the pay.
CA might be a different story, but I've only had a few that actually picked it up. And that was usually so they could move a day cause they had something where they need a day off, not the pay.
I've had several PHL captains tell me they pick up red-eyes because at their seniority level, they are the only commutable trips they can hold.
You will see several awarded off of the AIL almost every day.
That is one reason why many pilots will stay in the right seat of the 757 or 330 until they die.
08-16-2015, 07:42 AM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,889
Originally Posted by DCA A321 FO
I think the big thing is trips covering 3 calender days but paying less than 15 hours, that's the new big bit(h, but hey, so many voted YES.
That wasn't so much a product of the Yes vote. We haven't had 5hr min calendar day here since the 80s and apparently the membership never deemed it important enough with the '91, '97, and '03 contracts. It was never a high priority item for some reason. So my guess is voting No would have not changed that, as many LUS pilots who had worked under Parker had told me during the voting process: their take on it was that Parker would have been just fine keeping the $1.6B and keeping us on the old contract - which still didn't have 5hr min day.
Basically, thanks to the corner APA painted us into - the old cost-neutral arbitration backstop - Parker won with either a yes or no vote. He had no incentive to suddenly soften up and grant us wish list items with a no vote. Why would he? With a no vote, he'd become the darling of the arbitrators and we'd be susceptible to a contract modified by an arbitrator's interpretation of cost-neutral, minus a huge chunk of $$$. The JCBA was no Delta deal, where the company would be under pressure to deal with angry pilots: in our case, the company had a contract whether we voted yes or no. The no vote was even more lucrative for them, sparing them $1.6B and keeping us well below delta and united for the next several years.
The two LBFOs of 2012, however, did not have any cost neutral backstops and were a lot more similar to the Delta deal due to the leverage we had. As such, I was a No voter on both of them, based on the fact that we had a great opportunity to squeeze them. We did on #1 but not enough on #2, which passed.
So in this pilot's opinion, the 5hr min day was not going to become reality regardless of how we voted. Any proof of that, just look at how smoothly the operation ran over the Christmas and New Year period which was when we were all awaiting the company's response to the APA's modified demands - after Kirby basically told us to pi$$ off the first time.
Let's face it - we were neutered the day APA and AA signed the MOU. The JCBA vote, yes or no, was just a formality.
08-16-2015, 08:41 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,533
Originally Posted by aa73
Yeah we do have some of those but we also have some where you do 3 legs, sit for 24, then a red eye back, that pay 15+.
That wasn't so much a product of the Yes vote. We haven't had 5hr min calendar day here since the 80s and apparently the membership never deemed it important enough with the '91, '97, and '03 contracts. It was never a high priority item for some reason. So my guess is voting No would have not changed that, as many LUS pilots who had worked under Parker had told me during the voting process: their take on it was that Parker would have been just fine keeping the $1.6B and keeping us on the old contract - which still didn't have 5hr min day.
Basically, thanks to the corner APA painted us into - the old cost-neutral arbitration backstop - Parker won with either a yes or no vote. He had no incentive to suddenly soften up and grant us wish list items with a no vote. Why would he? With a no vote, he'd become the darling of the arbitrators and we'd be susceptible to a contract modified by an arbitrator's interpretation of cost-neutral, minus a huge chunk of $$$. The JCBA was no Delta deal, where the company would be under pressure to deal with angry pilots: in our case, the company had a contract whether we voted yes or no. The no vote was even more lucrative for them, sparing them $1.6B and keeping us well below delta and united for the next several years.
The two LBFOs of 2012, however, did not have any cost neutral backstops and were a lot more similar to the Delta deal due to the leverage we had. As such, I was a No voter on both of them, based on the fact that we had a great opportunity to squeeze them. We did on #1 but not enough on #2, which passed.
So in this pilot's opinion, the 5hr min day was not going to become reality regardless of how we voted. Any proof of that, just look at how smoothly the operation ran over the Christmas and New Year period which was when we were all awaiting the company's response to the APA's modified demands - after Kirby basically told us to pi$$ off the first time.
Let's face it - we were neutered the day APA and AA signed the MOU. The JCBA vote, yes or no, was just a formality.
That wasn't so much a product of the Yes vote. We haven't had 5hr min calendar day here since the 80s and apparently the membership never deemed it important enough with the '91, '97, and '03 contracts. It was never a high priority item for some reason. So my guess is voting No would have not changed that, as many LUS pilots who had worked under Parker had told me during the voting process: their take on it was that Parker would have been just fine keeping the $1.6B and keeping us on the old contract - which still didn't have 5hr min day.
Basically, thanks to the corner APA painted us into - the old cost-neutral arbitration backstop - Parker won with either a yes or no vote. He had no incentive to suddenly soften up and grant us wish list items with a no vote. Why would he? With a no vote, he'd become the darling of the arbitrators and we'd be susceptible to a contract modified by an arbitrator's interpretation of cost-neutral, minus a huge chunk of $$$. The JCBA was no Delta deal, where the company would be under pressure to deal with angry pilots: in our case, the company had a contract whether we voted yes or no. The no vote was even more lucrative for them, sparing them $1.6B and keeping us well below delta and united for the next several years.
The two LBFOs of 2012, however, did not have any cost neutral backstops and were a lot more similar to the Delta deal due to the leverage we had. As such, I was a No voter on both of them, based on the fact that we had a great opportunity to squeeze them. We did on #1 but not enough on #2, which passed.
So in this pilot's opinion, the 5hr min day was not going to become reality regardless of how we voted. Any proof of that, just look at how smoothly the operation ran over the Christmas and New Year period which was when we were all awaiting the company's response to the APA's modified demands - after Kirby basically told us to pi$$ off the first time.
Let's face it - we were neutered the day APA and AA signed the MOU. The JCBA vote, yes or no, was just a formality.
08-16-2015, 03:21 PM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,967
Originally Posted by aa73
Yeah we do have some of those but we also have some where you do 3 legs, sit for 24, then a red eye back, that pay 15+.
That wasn't so much a product of the Yes vote. We haven't had 5hr min calendar day here since the 80s and apparently the membership never deemed it important enough with the '91, '97, and '03 contracts. It was never a high priority item for some reason. So my guess is voting No would have not changed that, as many LUS pilots who had worked under Parker had told me during the voting process: their take on it was that Parker would have been just fine keeping the $1.6B and keeping us on the old contract - which still didn't have 5hr min day.
Basically, thanks to the corner APA painted us into - the old cost-neutral arbitration backstop - Parker won with either a yes or no vote. He had no incentive to suddenly soften up and grant us wish list items with a no vote. Why would he? With a no vote, he'd become the darling of the arbitrators and we'd be susceptible to a contract modified by an arbitrator's interpretation of cost-neutral, minus a huge chunk of $$$. The JCBA was no Delta deal, where the company would be under pressure to deal with angry pilots: in our case, the company had a contract whether we voted yes or no. The no vote was even more lucrative for them, sparing them $1.6B and keeping us well below delta and united for the next several years.
The two LBFOs of 2012, however, did not have any cost neutral backstops and were a lot more similar to the Delta deal due to the leverage we had. As such, I was a No voter on both of them, based on the fact that we had a great opportunity to squeeze them. We did on #1 but not enough on #2, which passed.
So in this pilot's opinion, the 5hr min day was not going to become reality regardless of how we voted. Any proof of that, just look at how smoothly the operation ran over the Christmas and New Year period which was when we were all awaiting the company's response to the APA's modified demands - after Kirby basically told us to pi$$ off the first time.
Let's face it - we were neutered the day APA and AA signed the MOU. The JCBA vote, yes or no, was just a formality.
That wasn't so much a product of the Yes vote. We haven't had 5hr min calendar day here since the 80s and apparently the membership never deemed it important enough with the '91, '97, and '03 contracts. It was never a high priority item for some reason. So my guess is voting No would have not changed that, as many LUS pilots who had worked under Parker had told me during the voting process: their take on it was that Parker would have been just fine keeping the $1.6B and keeping us on the old contract - which still didn't have 5hr min day.
Basically, thanks to the corner APA painted us into - the old cost-neutral arbitration backstop - Parker won with either a yes or no vote. He had no incentive to suddenly soften up and grant us wish list items with a no vote. Why would he? With a no vote, he'd become the darling of the arbitrators and we'd be susceptible to a contract modified by an arbitrator's interpretation of cost-neutral, minus a huge chunk of $$$. The JCBA was no Delta deal, where the company would be under pressure to deal with angry pilots: in our case, the company had a contract whether we voted yes or no. The no vote was even more lucrative for them, sparing them $1.6B and keeping us well below delta and united for the next several years.
The two LBFOs of 2012, however, did not have any cost neutral backstops and were a lot more similar to the Delta deal due to the leverage we had. As such, I was a No voter on both of them, based on the fact that we had a great opportunity to squeeze them. We did on #1 but not enough on #2, which passed.
So in this pilot's opinion, the 5hr min day was not going to become reality regardless of how we voted. Any proof of that, just look at how smoothly the operation ran over the Christmas and New Year period which was when we were all awaiting the company's response to the APA's modified demands - after Kirby basically told us to pi$$ off the first time.
Let's face it - we were neutered the day APA and AA signed the MOU. The JCBA vote, yes or no, was just a formality.
But the APA did absolutely whatever they had to do to get rid of ToHo. I'll give them credit for that.
08-16-2015, 03:57 PM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,764
Originally Posted by PurpleTurtle
Yeah, the APA did a pathetic job and had incompetent leaders (unless they intended to showcase themselves for management jobs). Billion$ of profit and they let Parker and Glass dictate everything.
But the APA did absolutely whatever they had to do to get rid of ToHo. I'll give them credit for that.
But the APA did absolutely whatever they had to do to get rid of ToHo. I'll give them credit for that.
(and a $3600 dinner)
08-16-2015, 04:07 PM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,967
Originally Posted by Arado 234
don't forget the hotly debated j/s issue!
(and a $3600 dinner)
(and a $3600 dinner)
Yeah, credit for that too.
And credit for giving up our profit sharing and keeping their Pension along with a huge equity in the combined company. Maybe the APA dolts aren't so pathetic after all with reference to quid pro quo.
08-16-2015, 06:24 PM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,889
I'm on the j/s committee and can tell you that the IVR is coming our way this fall. However our BOD also has a duty to consider the requests of all involved, and much of the LAA pilot group wants to look into a hybrid system in which there is some seniority involved. That's a year or two away at least. I think the LAA pilots eventually will grow to like the IVR. In any case many changes heading our way there. We have an awesome committee and I greatly enjoy working with our LUS counterparts.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
kingair130
Flight Schools and Training
8
10-08-2009 08:55 PM
flybywire44
Major
51
11-08-2007 12:13 PM
