FDX - Why B-767 Instructors?
03-25-2013, 09:18 AM
#141
Part Time Employee
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
Posts: 1,918
Originally Posted by RedeyeAV8r
I think he means a 767 for example cant do SFO-IND turn IND-SFO with the same crew do to 8 in 24. But if they have an extra 757, they could build it SFO-IND turn IND-DTW.
I agree it could happen, but for $$ reasons It will cost them more with two bid packs than one, so i think it will be kept to a Minimum.
I agree it could happen, but for $$ reasons It will cost them more with two bid packs than one, so i think it will be kept to a Minimum.
I know what he is getting at (I forgot the
). Also, IND - DTW is usually a WB so just leave the 76 on the leg
03-25-2013, 09:24 AM
#142
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,838
Originally Posted by FDXLAG
In this context it means not being able to return to the west coast. But a quick little trip to GSP is not out of the question.
Again my point is not to predict what will happen it is to explain what could happen. All of our pairing are getting tighter. Mixing some 76/75 legs into a single line must have occurred to someone, we spend a lot of time discussing it in the loa. You think the company hasn't already made some optimizer test runs?
Your arguments would be valid if we could take 727 flying and give it to the 777. Again the Aircraft are manned by the amount of flying scheduled but the trips are distributed based on what the optimizer says.
Again my point is not to predict what will happen it is to explain what could happen. All of our pairing are getting tighter. Mixing some 76/75 legs into a single line must have occurred to someone, we spend a lot of time discussing it in the loa. You think the company hasn't already made some optimizer test runs?
Your arguments would be valid if we could take 727 flying and give it to the 777. Again the Aircraft are manned by the amount of flying scheduled but the trips are distributed based on what the optimizer says.
Where we disagree is
If the Company plans on doing it,I just think it is in the long term best interest if it is in a Bid Pack that pays 100% Widebody, Regualr lines, Reserve line and VTO as well as training. All Vacation, Sick and *** Disability will be paid WB
You would rather have a Mixed Bid pack where some will get Widebody pay, but most won't or will get reduced becasue not all flying will pay WB, Especially RSV and VTO and Sick Vacation.
What happens to a Senior 757 Pilot in a combined Bid pack that goes on extended Sick? Narrow body pay.
03-25-2013, 09:57 AM
#143
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Originally Posted by RedeyeAV8r
I think we are in agreement that the Company can and will mix 75/76 flying.
Where we disagree is
If the Company plans on doing it,I just think it is in the long term best interest if it is in a Bid Pack that pays 100% Widebody, Regualr lines, Reserve line and VTO as well as training. All Vacation, Sick and *** Disability will be paid WB
You would rather have a Mixed Bid pack where some will get Widebody pay, but most won't or will get reduced becasue not all flying will pay WB, Especially RSV and VTO and Sick Vacation.
What happens to a Senior 757 Pilot in a combined Bid pack that goes on extended Sick? Narrow body pay.
Where we disagree is
If the Company plans on doing it,I just think it is in the long term best interest if it is in a Bid Pack that pays 100% Widebody, Regualr lines, Reserve line and VTO as well as training. All Vacation, Sick and *** Disability will be paid WB
You would rather have a Mixed Bid pack where some will get Widebody pay, but most won't or will get reduced becasue not all flying will pay WB, Especially RSV and VTO and Sick Vacation.
What happens to a Senior 757 Pilot in a combined Bid pack that goes on extended Sick? Narrow body pay.
Nope I just would just like to see some assurance that if too much flying leaves the 75 bid pack there is a way to address blg delta. I know, just like that guy with the mustache at indoc said about 4a2b, it can't happen here.
It is a moot point the loa will pass.
03-25-2013, 10:29 AM
#144
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
Originally Posted by FDXLAG
Unlike you guys I don't think 1 or 2 bid packs makes a difference. Or at least it doesn't when you start from scratch. It is all in the language. We will never know what we gave up to get 2 bid packs.
Nope I just would just like to see some assurance that if too much flying leaves the 75 bid pack there is a way to address blg delta.
Nope I just would just like to see some assurance that if too much flying leaves the 75 bid pack there is a way to address blg delta.
You actually prefer the idea of variable income as long as the BLG delta is nonexistent. I feel just the opposite. I know going into this that there will be a some delta but it is mitigated by a penalty system.
I'd like to restrict the company from using unreasonable deltas but the NC will have to get that in the contract.
03-25-2013, 10:51 AM
#145
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Posts: 556
Originally Posted by FDXLAG
Unlike you guys I don't think 1 or 2 bid packs makes a difference. Or at least it doesn't when you start from scratch. It is all in the language. We will never know what we gave up to get 2 bid packs.
Nope I just would just like to see some assurance that if too much flying leaves the 75 bid pack there is a way to address blg delta. I know, just like that guy with the mustache at indoc said about 4a2b, it can't happen here.
It is a moot point the loa will pass.
Nope I just would just like to see some assurance that if too much flying leaves the 75 bid pack there is a way to address blg delta. I know, just like that guy with the mustache at indoc said about 4a2b, it can't happen here.
It is a moot point the loa will pass.
03-25-2013, 11:19 AM
#146
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Originally Posted by Gunter
Interesting.
You actually prefer the idea of variable income as long as the BLG delta is nonexistent. I feel just the opposite. I know going into this that there will be a some delta but it is mitigated by a penalty system.
I'd like to restrict the company from using unreasonable deltas but the NC will have to get that in the contract.
You actually prefer the idea of variable income as long as the BLG delta is nonexistent. I feel just the opposite. I know going into this that there will be a some delta but it is mitigated by a penalty system.
I'd like to restrict the company from using unreasonable deltas but the NC will have to get that in the contract.
Lets pretend that the company's new hiring policy results in a vastily smarter crew force that agrees with me. 10 years from now we negotiate a contract that combines the 76 and 75 bid packs. Wouldn't the logical starting point be keeping the same ratio of 76 and 75 lines?
Originally Posted by 4A2B
I think you have a valid point about our pay system in general, but to think we should get some type of BLG spread protection as a part of the LOA that would not apply to all aircraft would just be propagating another CBA benefit that does not universally apply. The 757 and 767 bid packs have as much or little BLG delta as any other aircraft we fly. The Company can move flying in and out of any one, with HKG being the most costly, but they can still do it.
It would just apply to the acft that the loa will be used to move trips (very important part of BLG) from one bid pack to the other. You can't move MD trips to the 777 bid pack.
Here is the example that proves you guys all wrong: The company is currently moving trips from the Mem 75 bid pack to the CGN bid pack to balance blg. This LOA actually prevents them from doing that in the future to plus up MEM 75 blg with 76 trips.
03-25-2013, 12:11 PM
#147
Part Time Employee
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
Posts: 1,918
Originally Posted by FDXLAG
....Lets pretend that the company's new hiring policy results in a vastily smarter crew force that agrees with me....
03-25-2013, 12:18 PM
#148
trip trading freak
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: MD-11
Posts: 673
Originally Posted by FDXLAG
Lets pretend that the company's new hiring policy results in a vastily smarter crew force that agrees with me. 10 years from now we negotiate a contract that combines the 76 and 75 bid packs. Wouldn't the logical starting point be keeping the same ratio of 76 and 75 lines?
Must be difficult having to explain yourself all the time due to the difference in intellect!
03-25-2013, 12:27 PM
#150
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
Originally Posted by FDXLAG
Boy you fella's seem a little sensitive about your tiny uhm intellects.
At the risk of displaying too much intelligence for my hire date -
The simple solution you recommend probably limits management's flexibility too much. Easy to propose here but not so much at the table.
But maybe I'm just too dumb to understand....
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
