Quote:
You don't see a productivity gain with guys flying 90+ hours at straight pay? And yes, seeing some data would be good for both how VB affects us and how guys flying to FARs affect us. You are kind of proving my point - scheduling flexibility is good even though it cost jobs when guys exceed pick up limits. On the other hand basing flexibility is bad because it costs us jobs? You seem willing to overlook one while taking a firm stand against the other which is what I don't quite understand. Finally how does picking up extra flying help guys get other days off? I am not against trading just exceeding pick up limits. Scoop |
Inertia mostly. I have adapted to our current system. These over max pickups are how common? I did it once when I swapped a 2 day for a 4 day but it gave me 2 days off I needed. I probably could have dropped and then hoped for something to come available but I put a swap in to be sure I didn’t lose pay.
Again, I don’t think over max pickups are not common enough to address. VBs on the other hand are new and are easily put down. The data on VBs will come regardless of my objections. My fear is it will morph over time into something nobody wants or intended. |
Quote:
I agree that there is plenty of reason to be skeptical of VBs and I also agree with your point regarding inertia but that does not mean that we shouldn't try to improve upon our PWA in all areas. Its not like we are ever going back to days of the "Bow wave" and LOT bidding, but why have limits on pick-ups and then allow work-arounds? If we really care about productivity and improving advancement and more WB A jobs then lets look at all productivity aspects of the PWA equally and not make a stand on some while at the same time allowing others. Just like we improved (but did not totally eliminate) trip parking we can tighten up on our caps. Scoop |
Shut it down.
It's something the company wanted. If they want it bad enough, they can come back and ask again during the next negotiation. But the grace period has elapsed, and I see almost no upside for us. And, again, the company seemed to really want it. Just shut it down. |
Quote:
I'm all for people using the contract to their advantage, but I think a cap would be good for the whole group. |
Quote:
Right now we have the power to shut down a productivity grab and should do so. The other reforms you speak of are wins the company are not willing to give up without commensurate productivity savings. I see VBs as the low hanging fruit. |
Quote:
|
Some good discussion points raised.
>>Right now we have the power to shut down a productivity grab and should do so.<< This might be an opportune time to mention that there are 4 Local Council meetings in the next ten days or so. The newest version of the MEC will meet in early March. Hmmmm. CCN |
Quote:
Our crew resources newsletter said that Bos A320 would be the most reliable test to run and it would NOT BE COST EFFECTIVE. Some of the dreamers who think that Delta wants this so that you can drive to work 3 months out of the year and spend that much more time with your family need to wake up. They want this because they are thinking two contract cycles ahead of us. They will want the ocean crossing segment language removed. They will more than likely further attempt to degrade VB by removing the ocean crossing segment from a current DL base. We have over a dozen fleet types. Marketing doesn’t know what planes are flying where 45 days out on the domestic side of the operation. I just bought a ticket to Orlando for next month. B757 just changed to A321. 38 days from departure. They want virtual basing for wide bodies. Domestically, they can run all the non cost effective trials they want. It doesn’t work. Usair tried it. United tried it. Virgin America did it. Regionals have tried and failed. It doesn’t save the company money and for that reason it was shut down at all of those airlines. They’ve had over a year to set up the IT for a VB and couldn’t get that done. The grace period is over. Kill it. If they want another 1 year test period with the same conditions they can get it from us in C2020, at a cost of course. Maybe they will be ready for their test period at that time. Peel back the layers of virtual basing and I think when you find the core (the plan 4-8-12 years from now) you will see a vastly different concept than what we “think they will do.” |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
The limits that were put on this were put there for a reason. It works well in the middle of the country where there is a limited increase in credit and most rotations would be costal turns or two-days. What also hampers Delta using VB's as designed is how network utilizes their jets. The bump in credit they outlined for BOS is because there is a still a large mix of 737's and 320's doing the flying. The decide to go one way or the other on their gauge, the issue goes away. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:41 PM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons
Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands