Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 2523153)

Allowing Temporary Duty could lead to that as well as a massive reduction in overtime (especially during the summer) and fewer pilots needed. TD basically gives the company a flexible reserve contingent that can be moved around from base to base every month.........domestic or international.

Denny

Originally Posted by JamesBond (Post 2523158)

I don't support TD either unless those that come into a base under TD are at the bottom of the list after the permanently assigned pilots. The union would never go for that.

Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 2523164)

Ahhhhhhh Grasshopper, that's exactly what MOU #16-03 says. "A pilot who has been awarded a TDY slot will, in seniority order among TDY pilots, but below permanent pilots, in such category:...." Read section B of the Temporary Duty portion of the MOU.

Denny

Originally Posted by JamesBond (Post 2523168)

Does that include greenslips and the like? If it doesn't include EVERYTHING, then it is a failure imho.

Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 2523172)

One of the bullet points under the quote I gave you is it pertains to to Sections 23 E,N,O. 23 E is the PCS sequence which includes the award of just about everything.

Denny

Originally Posted by JamesBond (Post 2523227)

I'll look it up when I am not so lazy. :D

Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 2523256)

That's usually my attitude too!;)

IMO "Temporary Duty" allows for other bases to poach your bases flying by seemingly looking like it's in base flying because everyone is "based" in base...........at least for the month. What's the difference between another base flying your bases trips and bringing pilots in, on a temporary basis from another base, to fly your trips? I'll answer: NOTHING! Except it will reduce credit and manning along with a reduction in overtime and allow management almost unlimited flexibility. You wanna see even more pilots based in ATL? It's definitely a step closer to having all pilots based there.......

I know Sailingfun, I'm crying wolf here, making dire predictions etc. It really won't affect me much if any other than maybe not getting some overtime, I've only got 5.5 years left, but I do think this is a camels nose under the tent or worse...

Denny

Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 2523264)

For the most part, all Temporary Duty allows is for guys, who live in a base but cannot hold it on the equipment they are on, to not have to commute on a month to month basis. Before I get jumped on, notice I said "For the most part." There will always be exceptions.

Denny

Originally Posted by Herkflyr (Post 2523288)

There are too many unknowns to say "TDY bad" (or good). I'm skeptical on both TDY and VB, but don't want to make dire predictions when so much is speculation. We certainly agree that as a minimum we need to proceed carefully

Sent from my SM-G892U using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by notEnuf (Post 2523382)

I can think of plenty "bad" but no "good" for the pilot group. Plenty of good for the company though, with no bad.

Originally Posted by FL370esq (Post 2523155)

The current Crew Resources newsletter seems to support this but I go back to my previous question from a while ago....

Whose term sheet was the VB first on?

Originally Posted by Baradium (Post 2523317)

TDY is much more expensive than a based pilot.

Why? The only added cost I can see is a hotel room. What else is there expense wise that costs so much?

And if they are all coming below you in your base it is making more pairings available for your bidding with more pilots junior to you as well.

They will come in below the most junior in base pilot. How is it making more pairings available to bid? I foresee just the opposite. IMO the company will invoke TDY when they anticipate handing out a lot of green slips in a category thereby reducing green slips. With TDY they can adjust a category on a monthly basis. Heck, they could just grow ATL and TDY to category's they need too.

An alternative is to just build pairings that go through your base instead of originating there. So you still don't get the flying. With TDY and the TDY pilots going to the bottom of the list you'd end up with a better schedule than with flights not being available for your bid at all.

See above. You seem to think TDY pilots coming in base means more time in base. I don't.

It sounds like your biggest concern would be alleviated simply by restricting the amount of time that a TDY could be conducted, such as a maximum of 3 months.

Having worked somewhere previously that allowed TDY, it's not used how you seem to think.

Originally Posted by Herkflyr (Post 2523428)

I can think of one hypothetical positive (but purely that). What if the pilots in a VB (MCO 7ER for example, restricted to non ocean crossings per the contract) are senior commuters? Now the same guys currently flying sweet 3 day Europe trips might rather drive to work to fly a so so domestic. Thus the junior guys living in base are more senior and the VB guys can drive to work.

A true "win win." Of course we can turn that story on its head with a different twist and make it a "lose lose."

Devil is in the details, of which I'm skeptical.

Sent from my SM-G892U using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Baradium (Post 2523318)

My experience with TDYs is that senior pilots would bid it to get the per diem and hotels. The big change here though is that they'd have to give up all their seniority so I imagine it'd go more junior. TDYs generally go to commuters who don't live in a base period.

Originally Posted by LumberJack (Post 2523329)

What is this bizarro world? VB and TD are productivity and flexibility tools FOR THE COMPANY. I'm a big fan of this company, our product, and our pilots. And yes these things could benefit some pilots (myself included!). But I am NOT for reducing staffing requirements. Less pilots means less seniority for ALL.

Just open a real base or find a different solution that is actually win-win.

Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 2523596)

I know at least 1 guy flying my airplane that commutes across country to DTW. And he's just waiting till he can bid in to the base. I'm guessing there are quite a few more when you consider all the categories in my base (SEA). Are you trying to tell me they won't bid TDY to not commute? Come on......

Denny

Originally Posted by Baradium (Post 2523680)

With the way TDYs are most companies are set up, they are usually very valuable compensation wise, so the guys who can't hold the base such as your friend there can't hold them anyway because they go to really senior line holders who could have held the base in the first place. I'm not telling you they wouldn't bid a TDY, I'm telling you that usually a TDY pays enough that those guys don't get to do them.

Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 2523689)

Frankly, it doesn't matter how other companies do it, it matters how it's set up at Delta. With that in mind..........

I question why a senior guy in one base would bid TDY to another base and now lose all that seniority and bid at the bottom of the TD base........It doesn't make sense. It only makes sense for a commuter or a guy who lives in the TD base but cannot hold it.

You are gonna have to explain to me how bidding a TD base, with the corresponding loss of seniority, pays any more than flying out of their permanent base and keeping their seniority. I just don't see how. Heck, maybe I will do it if I can get more pay........:)

Denny

Originally Posted by Baradium (Post 2523709)

Since you don't seem to actually be reading what I am saying, I'll try again. This is exactly what I said:

And you don't seem to be hearing what I'm saying.:)

"My experience with TDYs is that senior pilots would bid it to get the per diem and hotels. The big change here though is that they'd have to give up all their seniority so I imagine it'd go more junior. TDYs generally go to commuters who don't live in a base period. "

Well, I see you're beginning to come around to my side.

I already gave you that it'd go more junior with the Delta rules, so you can argue that with yourself all you want.


As far as only people who would bid to that base if they could... which doesn't really make sense what you're upset about there the more I think about it. If they aren't senior enough to hold it they'd be at the bottom of the seniority list in that base anyway (where they'd definitely be under the TDY rules). Anyone else who wanted it would be able to bid for the TDY as well.

A reason for someone who doesn't live in a base to do a TDY is pretty clear. Paid hotels etc. Just paid hotels is money that costs the company. That is a cost that a based pilot doesn't have since they would be responsible for their own lodging. If a TDY pilot gets per diem it just goes up.



As far as why senior guys would do it, since I specified that it was the case in OTHER contracts, but you don't want to include them for discussions about TDYs overall it makes it difficult. You don't seem to be advocating against TDYs as currently written, you're against all TDYs regardless. If you would like to change your argument to TDYs as currently written per our contract aren't really great, we can have a different discussion. My point has simply been that they can be done in a beneficial way to the pilot group and are not cheaper than a based pilot.

Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 2523902)

IMO Temporary Duty potentially will be a huge hit to manning and overtime. It is a step in the direction of making ATL an even bigger pilot base than it is... I foresee the company making any/all category/s in Atlanta bigger while not increasing time and then using TDY to "right size" an outlying base on a month to month basis. This is NOT good for the pilot group.

You have not convinced me of what your last sentence says. You can say that all you want. The devil is in the details and you haven't provided any. I don't like the company's potential in our details. I think it's a baaad idea. Like I said in a previous post, it's probably not going to effect me much if it is implemented. I'd end up being more senior in category but probably lose out on overtime because of more pilots in a category with the same amount of flying.

Any way, it's been a good discussion and I'm sorry if I've ticked you off.

Denny

Originally Posted by Baradium (Post 2523913)

...I see the biggest use of the TDYs as allowing staffing changes that need to be done quickly while waiting for the AE process to provide the permanent pilots.

Originally Posted by DrunkIrishman (Post 2520800)

I’ll support VB’s if they increase our share of JV flying! Quid Pro Quo

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 2523135)

The pilot who had 234 hours last month living in FL might disagree with you! Probably a majority of international GS’s in NYC are assigned the day prior or early the day off.

Originally Posted by Vincent Chase (Post 2524078)

Citing a single guy who may live in FL for tax purposes and flies out of NYC while living in his crash pad is not indicative of the norm.

Just trying (like others) to point out your crazy logic.

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 2524094)

The only flaws in you argument are that he has no crash pad and lives full time in FL in a rather expensive home.

Originally Posted by Baradium (Post 2523913)

We were trying to talk about different things. My point is simply that TDYs as a whole aren't necessarily all that bad, it just depends on how the contract is written. I'm not arguing for TDYs as currently written in the contract, just saying that we could get them changed in a way that made for a good deal for us and one that cost the company enough to not use them much at all.


An important thing about TDY rules in the contract is to limit them in a way that they can't be regularly done to the same places. IE, you can't just have a TDY of 777 pilots to DTW every spring from any base. If done correctly, I see the biggest use of the TDYs as allowing staffing changes that need to be done quickly while waiting for the AE process to provide the permanent pilots.


You haven't ticked me off, sorry if I came across that way. I was just tired and posting before going to sleep.

Originally Posted by BobZ (Post 2524127)

Example...a NE region pbs bid run. This would allow network/CR to construct rotations free of the domicile end point requirements and provide pilots to bid schedules suited to their geographic compatibility to constructed rotations.

Originally Posted by 4fans (Post 2524537)

The newsletter was confusing. They basically showed their work and it seems like Boston 320was the most promising location for the company to try it but they determined it was not viable. But they still seemed to indicate that they are going to try several virtual bases this summer? What am I missing?

Originally Posted by Scoop (Post 2524819)

So are all of you guys against the VB concept also for setting a cap on swaps and trade with friends? To me all of these are productivity gains for the company.


Scoop

Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 2524845)

You’d have to be a little more specific but, in general, I’m with you.

Denny

Originally Posted by Scoop (Post 2524857)

As I understand it the Swap board and also Swap with friends have no pick-up limit. Open time has a max pick-up limit. Some Pilots use the swap board and Swap with friends to bypass the Max pick-up.

As long as its in the PWA it is perfectly fine with me. My question is why don't we try to remove them and set hard caps on all pick-ups? Both issues, VB and no pick-up limits, seem very similar in that they benefit those who choose to participate with more pay and flexibility at the expense of the Pilot group at large.

Lots of angst with the VB and yet no one seems to care about pick-ups. Reminds me when all the guys were going ballistic about reserves being able to fly to ALV+15 while the company sneaked in 30 day July and August months which is many many times more detrimental to the Pilot group.

Scoop :confused: