If I were management and wanted more point to point international service from mid sized cities like IND and AUS and felt pilot costs would be excessive I would do as has been done in the past with the carrot approach. A signed order as a example for 30 787’s contingent on VB’s for ocean crossing. Perhaps 1 VB base for each 3 airframes delivered.
They won’t get it in the next contract just by asking for it nor does this test set any precident in the next contract. As I have mentioned much ado about nothing. VB’s will die a natural death.

I said they have little shot. But the vast majority of greenslips go to the same handful of guys. At least in my category that is the case. I'm not complaining, just stating a fact.

The greenslip system is designed to benefit the very senior. The only way to short circuit that is to live in a highly commuted to base, and then you will get the short notice GSs. In a purely international category, skeds usually has the advance warning to be able to cover the vast majority of GSs the day prior because that's when the crew shortage occurs rather than short notice like domestic. Jmo, but in watching my category the last 18 years that is seemingly the way it is.

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.

Signed orders can be changed. They have these slimy things called lawyers that change them. Until they are sitting on the ramp with Delta on the side it isn't in the inventory.

My understanding of TDY is that it has far better received (by the pilot group) at airlines that have them than VBs. PS travel to/from, plus a hotel at company expense. It is all in the details.

Sent from my SM-G892U using Tapatalk

Fine. GSs all around. Wooo hooo. I am holding my breath because mine is surely in the phone line right now. Can't wait to get 234 hours like apparently everybody else is doing.

And was he/she really 'living' in Florida?

Well, I see it as giving the company the flexibility to "right size" every base every month for a few hotel rooms. I don't like it...

Denny

I'd rather see us protect international domicile flying for those that are based there. If it originates in a domicile, and there is a category there that flies it, those pilots should be doing that flying. Flights that originate out of a domicile are up for grabs.

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

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?