48/60 Blg
06-28-2008 | 05:54 AM
#31
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
I don't believe just limiting carryover is the fix though. I quickly brought up three calendars that show guys working twenty-eight days minimum out of each of the last six months (that's as far as I went back). That is work for four pilots being flown by two. If I can find two guys in about ten minutes doing that, how many are there really? There are guys who hawk open time every ten minutes throughout the day and even in lean times, there are trips popping up in open time.
Rather than just limit our carry-over built lines, I think the union should address a temporary max BLG.
06-28-2008 | 07:55 AM
#32
gets every day off
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
From: Retired MD11 Capt
That's good info.
I don't believe just limiting carryover is the fix though. I quickly brought up three calendars that show guys working twenty-eight days minimum out of each of the last six months (that's as far as I went back). That is work for four pilots being flown by two. If I can find two guys in about ten minutes doing that, how many are there really? There are guys who hawk open time every ten minutes throughout the day and even in lean times, there are trips popping up in open time.
Rather than just limit our carry-over built lines, I think the union should address a temporary max BLG.
I don't believe just limiting carryover is the fix though. I quickly brought up three calendars that show guys working twenty-eight days minimum out of each of the last six months (that's as far as I went back). That is work for four pilots being flown by two. If I can find two guys in about ten minutes doing that, how many are there really? There are guys who hawk open time every ten minutes throughout the day and even in lean times, there are trips popping up in open time.
Rather than just limit our carry-over built lines, I think the union should address a temporary max BLG.
We don't need to eliminate carryover trips... Indeed, the company needs carryover to provide continuity across bid months. What we need is an automatic "protect min days off" provision for each crewmember. That way the carryover flyers fly their carryover trips, but get trips/Rdays dropped in the next bid month to make min days off. Equal provisions across all seats, regardless of where the company chooses to apply carryover trips.
Last edited by Nitefrater; 06-28-2008 at 08:05 AM.
06-28-2008 | 09:03 AM
#33
Slainge Var'
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,530
Likes: 0
From: Zeppelin Tail Gunner
We don't need to eliminate carryover trips... Indeed, the company needs carryover to provide continuity across bid months. What we need is an automatic "protect min days off" provision for each crewmember. That way the carryover flyers fly their carryover trips, but get trips/Rdays dropped in the next bid month to make min days off. Equal provisions across all seats, regardless of where the company chooses to apply carryover trips.
06-28-2008 | 09:28 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 376
Likes: 0
From: On the corner, covered in Stickum
We don't need to eliminate carryover trips... Indeed, the company needs carryover to provide continuity across bid months. What we need is an automatic "protect min days off" provision for each crewmember. That way the carryover flyers fly their carryover trips, but get trips/Rdays dropped in the next bid month to make min days off. Equal provisions across all seats, regardless of where the company chooses to apply carryover trips.
We have a winner!
06-28-2008 | 10:12 AM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,409
Likes: 0
We don't need to eliminate carryover trips... Indeed, the company needs carryover to provide continuity across bid months. What we need is an automatic "protect min days off" provision for each crewmember. That way the carryover flyers fly their carryover trips, but get trips/Rdays dropped in the next bid month to make min days off. Equal provisions across all seats, regardless of where the company chooses to apply carryover trips.
06-28-2008 | 12:48 PM
#37
Trust but Verify!!
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 684
Likes: 0
From: MD11 CRA
We don't need to eliminate carryover trips... Indeed, the company needs carryover to provide continuity across bid months. What we need is an automatic "protect min days off" provision for each crewmember. That way the carryover flyers fly their carryover trips, but get trips/Rdays dropped in the next bid month to make min days off. Equal provisions across all seats, regardless of where the company chooses to apply carryover trips.
06-28-2008 | 04:33 PM
#38
Slainge Var'
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,530
Likes: 0
From: Zeppelin Tail Gunner
That probably would work. There are a few trips out there that require carryover into the next month to cover them. The sixty hour carryovers are what kill us. Having the min days off would force the company to limit the amount of big carryover trips since they would be hosing themselves in the following month.
06-28-2008 | 05:43 PM
#39
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
This totally makes sense. If we had done this a couple months ago, would we be down to 68CH now with management in panic mode?
I will be e-mailing my block rep about this.
I will be e-mailing my block rep about this.
Last edited by Piloto Noche; 06-29-2008 at 07:36 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
