FedEx 767, more traction...
11-15-2011, 05:21 AM
#71
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: 1559
Posts: 1,533
Al Baker on Airbus
That is the same mistake Airbus made a couple of years ago with FedEx. Airbus wouldn't commit to the conversion program. Had they jumped in aggressively when FedEx first approached them, then I believe we would already be in the process of training the initial cadre.
That is the same mistake Airbus made a couple of years ago with FedEx. Airbus wouldn't commit to the conversion program. Had they jumped in aggressively when FedEx first approached them, then I believe we would already be in the process of training the initial cadre.
11-15-2011, 08:32 AM
#72
Living the dream!
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: MD-11 Capt
Posts: 915
Originally Posted by MacGuy2
Really, how difficult and time consuming is the LRN?? And if it keeps one crew from a gross navigational error, then it's a not a bad thing.
MG2
MG2
Gross nav error with GPSs .. really?
11-15-2011, 04:07 PM
#73
Part Time Employee
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
Posts: 1,918
Originally Posted by R1200RT
Just fill it out before you walk out to the plane, saves lots of time it's never forgotten.
Gross nav error with GPSs .. really?
Gross nav error with GPSs .. really?
Yes we have had them - it's the ole "garbage in - garbage out" problem
11-16-2011, 10:55 AM
#74
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,196
O mentioned today that we will hopefully have a public decision on the next airplane within the next couple months. He was very careful not to hint at what it would be other than probably the 767 or 330. Said it would move into MD-10 turf domestically and possibly fly Atlantic routes.
If the choice is the 767, and it flies US-Europe routes...do we really need a 757 CGN domicile?
If the choice is the 767, and it flies US-Europe routes...do we really need a 757 CGN domicile?
11-16-2011, 11:16 AM
#75
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 983
Originally Posted by Rock
O mentioned today that we will hopefully have a public decision on the next airplane within the next couple months. He was very careful not to hint at what it would be other than probably the 767 or 330. Said it would move into MD-10 turf domestically and possibly fly Atlantic routes.
If the choice is the 767, and it flies US-Europe routes...do we really need a 757 CGN domicile?
If the choice is the 767, and it flies US-Europe routes...do we really need a 757 CGN domicile?
11-16-2011, 11:17 AM
#76
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: leaning to the left
Posts: 4,184
Originally Posted by Rock
...If the choice is the 767, and it flies US-Europe routes...do we really need a 757 CGN domicile?
Maybe that would be the impetus to do away with the narrowbody payrate.
Wait...That wouldn't be leverage, would it?
11-16-2011, 12:00 PM
#77
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,196
Originally Posted by Busboy
Are you inferring that the 767 crew could then fly intra-europe on the 757s? I don't believe that's possible under the current CBA.
Maybe that would be the impetus to do away with the narrowbody payrate.
Wait...That wouldn't be leverage, would it?
Maybe that would be the impetus to do away with the narrowbody payrate.
Wait...That wouldn't be leverage, would it?
11-16-2011, 01:31 PM
#78
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: MD11 Kitchen Bi*ch
Posts: 263
Originally Posted by Rock
The 757/767 type rating would allow pilots to fly either platform. If Fedex buys the 767 it wouldn't make sense to limit pilots with the type rating to only fly one of the aircraft types. I hate to use the term "common sense", but I'd hope it applies here. O mentioned in a sidebar that the 76 would definitely be considered a widebody. Plenty of ways to skin the cat. Most of them are basically win-win. Really, the only "lose" would be to limit pilots to either the 75 or the 76. Less scheduling flexibility and more training for FedEx. Less scheduling flexibility and possibly less pay for pilots.
My 2c is to pay the higher pay scale of the model plane SCHEDULED for the flight or the ACTUAL plane used on the trip. Thus if scheduled to fly a 76, you get widebody pay regardless of which one your sitting in. If scheduled to fly a 75 and they roll a 76 for you, then it's a jackpot day.
11-16-2011, 02:05 PM
#79
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: leaning to the left
Posts: 4,184
Yes the 757/767 type rating would allow a pilot to operate either aircraft. And, I would agree to allow it into our CBA, if the company would agree to pay widebody rates on everything. Get it? One payscale. Like our largest competitors have.
The increased productivity of the common type would be enormous, for the company. But, I'm sure that we wouldn't have leverage enough to beg for such a thing, right?
And in reference to "common sense"...Which side of the contract are you working under? I've had many instances of dealing with issues that I thought were common sense, that were answered by the company with something other than non-common sense.
Of course, my interpretation of the contract may be biased. Wouldn't be the first time.
The increased productivity of the common type would be enormous, for the company. But, I'm sure that we wouldn't have leverage enough to beg for such a thing, right?
And in reference to "common sense"...Which side of the contract are you working under? I've had many instances of dealing with issues that I thought were common sense, that were answered by the company with something other than non-common sense.
Of course, my interpretation of the contract may be biased. Wouldn't be the first time.
Last edited by Busboy; 11-16-2011 at 02:39 PM. Reason: Disclaimer
11-16-2011, 03:22 PM
#80
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2010
Position: Bent Over
Posts: 229
Originally Posted by Rock
The 757/767 type rating would allow pilots to fly either platform. If Fedex buys the 767 it wouldn't make sense to limit pilots with the type rating to only fly one of the aircraft types. I hate to use the term "common sense", but I'd hope it applies here. O mentioned in a sidebar that the 76 would definitely be considered a widebody. Plenty of ways to skin the cat. Most of them are basically win-win. Really, the only "lose" would be to limit pilots to either the 75 or the 76. Less scheduling flexibility and more training for FedEx. Less scheduling flexibility and possibly less pay for pilots.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
