FDX - Why B-767 Instructors?
03-24-2013 | 01:54 PM
#91
Part Time Employee
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,918
Likes: 0
From: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
No disagreement. This LOA will pass and the 757 guys will suck it up with their current lower pay rate and likely, a much lower average blg. Does not mean it had to be that way, we chose to make it that way. You could just as easily used SCH to define the ratio of WB and NB, regular and reserve lines in a single bid pack.
Had we insisted that the sig could move 76 trips into the 75 bid pack with an average blg delta of say 4 hours I wouldn't have a complaint.
Had we insisted that the sig could move 76 trips into the 75 bid pack with an average blg delta of say 4 hours I wouldn't have a complaint.
I would like to see more in this LOA also. Reality is - it's called negotiating for a reason!
03-24-2013 | 01:56 PM
#92
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,047
Likes: 0
From: 767 FO
A BLG delta is a problem in our system, not just between the 757/767 if this passes, I for one hope we get a BLG split that in the next CBA that is not just 13 hours in a seat but needs to look across the board to ensure there is not a huge discrepancy. (don't get me started on the hidden pay hours in the 777).
As for the SCH, the only thing it falls a little short on is the "penalty", we are going to have to hope that it will be easier for the Company to man and offer subsequent bids to meet the ratios rather than living with the "double reserve" penalty. Our NC is on record saying it will work and I believe them. The ratio is pure though, meaning it is a apples to apples measure of units of work (767 CH) compared to units of work (757 CH) and divided into the total pilot population so as long as the formula is pure it will ensure that staffing in the 757 is replicated in the 767. I will be very interested to see it in action, but from a math point of view it sure seems like a method that is not easily skewed, unless the "penalty" is not viewed as a penalty by the Company which Tony is discussing on another thread. I think it will be as the Company appears to be going thin on reserves as a new SOP since 4a2b so adding extra R24 lines (read hotel expense since that is the only way they seem to be able to use them) it would seem easier to just meet the ratio on the front end?
As for the SCH, the only thing it falls a little short on is the "penalty", we are going to have to hope that it will be easier for the Company to man and offer subsequent bids to meet the ratios rather than living with the "double reserve" penalty. Our NC is on record saying it will work and I believe them. The ratio is pure though, meaning it is a apples to apples measure of units of work (767 CH) compared to units of work (757 CH) and divided into the total pilot population so as long as the formula is pure it will ensure that staffing in the 757 is replicated in the 767. I will be very interested to see it in action, but from a math point of view it sure seems like a method that is not easily skewed, unless the "penalty" is not viewed as a penalty by the Company which Tony is discussing on another thread. I think it will be as the Company appears to be going thin on reserves as a new SOP since 4a2b so adding extra R24 lines (read hotel expense since that is the only way they seem to be able to use them) it would seem easier to just meet the ratio on the front end?
03-24-2013 | 01:56 PM
#93
Thread Starter
Organizational Learning
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,948
Likes: 0
From: Directly behind the combiner
03-24-2013 | 02:00 PM
#94
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,047
Likes: 0
From: 767 FO
No instead we have some convoluted formula of adding R24 lines if aquarius rises outside of taurus.
03-24-2013 | 02:04 PM
#95
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,047
Likes: 0
From: 767 FO
I think we all agree that objective is to over man the 75 and under man the 76. What is the easiest way to tell if a seat is over manned?
03-24-2013 | 02:04 PM
#96
Part Time Employee
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,918
Likes: 0
From: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
03-24-2013 | 02:14 PM
#97
Thread Starter
Organizational Learning
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,948
Likes: 0
From: Directly behind the combiner
A BLG delta is a problem in our system, not just between the 757/767 if this passes, I for one hope we get a BLG split that in the next CBA that is not just 13 hours in a seat but needs to look across the board to ensure there is not a huge discrepancy. (don't get me started on the hidden pay hours in the 777).
As for the SCH, the only thing it falls a little short on is the "penalty", we are going to have to hope that it will be easier for the Company to man and offer subsequent bids to meet the ratios rather than living with the "double reserve" penalty. Our NC is on record saying it will work and I believe them. The ratio is pure though, meaning it is a apples to apples measure of units of work (767 CH) compared to units of work (757 CH) and divided into the total pilot population so as long as the formula is pure it will ensure that staffing in the 757 is replicated in the 767. I will be very interested to see it in action, but from a math point of view it sure seems like a method that is not easily skewed, ...
Granted, the ratio is Credit Hours, not Block Hours, but we never seem to get the same "bang for our buck" with synthetic time. It may not be the most accurate metric, but it might be the most accurate which is readily available and relatively easy to monitor and verify.
... unless the "penalty" is not viewed as a penalty by the Company which Tony is discussing on another thread. I think it will be as the Company appears to be going thin on reserves as a new SOP since 4a2b so adding extra R24 lines (read hotel expense since that is the only way they seem to be able to use them) it would seem easier to just meet the ratio on the front end?
And yeah, that's in another thread.
.
03-24-2013 | 02:15 PM
#98
Thread Starter
Organizational Learning
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,948
Likes: 0
From: Directly behind the combiner
03-24-2013 | 02:57 PM
#100
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,201
Likes: 0
Here's where the majority of our attention should be focused. I think we could all agree that we want to protect wide-body seats, but what exactly does that mean?..........
And so where we used to be able to use "seats" and "warm bodies" interchangably, these schemes that allow narrow-body "warm bodies" to sit in wide-body "seat" tend to confuse the conversation and obscure the fact that we're degrading seniority. The more efficient the scheme for The Company, the more seats will be affected.
.
And so where we used to be able to use "seats" and "warm bodies" interchangably, these schemes that allow narrow-body "warm bodies" to sit in wide-body "seat" tend to confuse the conversation and obscure the fact that we're degrading seniority. The more efficient the scheme for The Company, the more seats will be affected.
.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
