Exactly right, I wonder what he thinks now.

All fair points guys. No Im not new. I spent 10 yers at the regionals and I know what a crappy contract is and what 0 movement is and fear of furlough. I know first hand what it feels like. Im not at all oblivious to how that second officer didn't understand what you were eluding to by his desire to fly more could cost jobs. I simply am stating that I wasn't aware that our goal was to ask for contract negotiations simply under the premise that we can grow the list. If I wanted to make your argument I would be advocating for no ability to pick up any trips, white, yellow or green and demand more staffing. I hope you at least see how absurd that is. I don't believe that my desire to fly within my legal perimeters is asking too much. I don't do it often but when I do I should be able to if legal, is all I am stating. I will end by stating I also see your points, and even though it seems as I don't agree I would be willing to bet we have similar views on most. However In this very specific case I made is where I disagree.

You are stating you want the ability to fly to FAR’s. I suspect would cost at least 1500 jobs. It will delay all your upgrades including making Captain for years.

And effectively pull the ladder up behind you. The most noble of greedy intentions.

Yes I am stating that, or maybe making that also have a “max pickup limt, to say 90 hours. I again won’t entirely disagree with your point Sailing but I also believe that I should be able to fly within my legal FAR’s to some extent. Like I said in my last post, if we got together over some beers you would find I agree with you a lot more on other issues than this particular post would seem but in this case we disagree, and That’s ok.

FAR limits are tangential to the PWA. Our manning is determined and controlled by credit hours which may/may not be directly tied to block hours, hence the existence/benefit of a 5+15 ADG, 1:2 duty rigs and 1:3.5 trip rigs.

As a union, we have agreed that credit is king. In your case, you want to ignore the benefit of the credit which got you to the pick-up limit but then want to rely solely on FAR block limits to continue to receive pay. Would you rather fly two one-day trips for only 2.5 hours of block each day (where maybe you fly 1.3 somewhere, sit for 4+58 then fly a 1.2 back) rather than a single one-day that has a 5:15 ADG? In essence, that is what you are saying. I would prefer to work smarter, not harder...but that's me.

That’s not at all what I am suggesting. Im with you work smart not hard. I am asy saying that for the LIMIT make actual and projected flight time up to a limit be the deciding factor not credit. I’m at ~ 70 hours of actual this month and getting paid for almost 86. That’s awesome and I’m not going to complain one bit. I just see it differently.thats all.

Dorn,

Look at it this way. If a lot of the guys senior to you jumped from 70 hours block to say 85 hours block this month - how much do you think would have been left for you?

There are pros of eliminating caps but there are also cons.

Scoop

Scoop,

That would be their right to do so. Seniority should have its perks.

Who hacked SF's account? Great post.

But....to hit the FAR limit, you might accrue 120 hours of credit. That'll put a damper on manning if permitted across the board.

I can't believe we're having this conversation.

And I'll third that great post by Sailingfun.

You guys are arguing the wrong question.

What we have NOW is status quo...it doesn't cost ANY jobs

If you CHANGE the status quo...now you can start discussing how many jobs are created or marginalized

This kinda started with the *****ing about flying above alv +15 due to swap board and swap with pot. Some are pushing to curtail that because it "costs jobs". I will reiterate...it doesn't currently cost ANY jobs....when it got voted in years ago is when the job loss occurred. The argument would be analogous to discussing implementation of PBS and the huuuge loss or jobs that enabled. At this juncture that is also a moot point cause it is "baked in" the hiring practices and the "expectations" of both new and old pilots

When someone wants to change the status quo is when one needs to ask themselves "whose ox is getting gored" . In the case we are discussing EVERY pilot has the capacity to fly above the cap, some categories much more so than others. If that is something you want to do ,great , position yourself to make that happen. Just don't not avail yourself of that opportunity and then complain that others are stealing your progression.

Again, this practice helps a lot when people want to modify their schedule and are unable to so do to capped reserve days.
Additionally, the trip parking prolly needed to change due to abrogation of seniority due to bidding cliques. SWP does not do that nor does icrew swap board because all pilots can avail themselves of the "open" trip. It's win/win pilot gets the free time he desires while another pilot may garner extra hours.

Frankly I'm surprised we're having it with a 10-year regional pilot, but it's healthy for the military folks who are new to Delta to learn about these issues.

Buck,
Totally agree!

Hey Googles,
If you cant believe "we are having this conversation" you don't have to participate. Then you can say "I can't believe "you are" having this conversation.and I will politely tell you that you are not forced to participate or even read this if its not in your wheel house. But to insinuate that others concerns are petty because they aren't of interest to you is, well........_________?😁

So ted,

If I understand your logic, only the tried/tested regional pilot is capable of 'seeing" the issues, and the ignorant military pilot is incapable of rational thought until you tell him what to think. You need to do this because you are a......seasoned professional?

How lovely, hope you don't use the same tact when approaching your spouse....it seems kinda patronizing 😉

While we are at it, (flying to FARs and all) let's get rid rid of the arbitrary 'retirement' age.

http://www.volnation.com/forum/image...lt/popcorn.gif

Are you seriously suggesting that we eliminate all maxes for pickup so the go getters can fly as much as they want?

A CBA isn't just to protect the pilot group from management. A lot of it is to protect us from ourselves. Seniority itself is the perfect example of that.

A PRP was a PRP before they were even a PRP. They just needed the opportunity to be one. Were it not for lots of CBA rules that directly and indirectly protect us from ourselves, we'd have a much higher suck quotient in the industry.

Not sure if the OP actually holds this viewpoint or not, but it is at least a prevalent stereotype that merits addressing. My experience talking to fellow pilots isn't scientific or statistically final, but it is fairly broad and consistent over time. What I've seen is that there isn't much difference across the mil/civ background demographics WRT most issues. If anything, lots of the more vocal of the "hawks" come from the mil side.

It may take some of them an extra year or so to adjust to the particulars of the industry of course, but even that is mitigated by the research (formal and tribal) that everyone does in their journey to get to the point of getting on with a "major" anyway. That doesn't just apply to SCOPE issues either. Former mil pilots seem to be just as motivated to learn the contract and seek remedies for when its limits are exceeded, as well as to pressure the union to negotiate for better limits going forward.

In any case, there's way too much heavy lifting to do for us to attempt to rely on one background or the other, even if the stereotypes were true (which I dispute based on experience anyway).

The huge effort on educating the pilot group about the intricacies of Scope and ME3/etc lately are absolutely aimed squarely at everyone, not just the mil side, because both sides benefit from the knowledge. Work rules are the exact same thing. They effect everyone, regardless of one's background.

Thank you for that valuable contribution.

Others’ concerns are not “petty.” But the premise — that we should be able to fly to FAR’s — is at the very least disconcerting. The fact that union members would advocate for this is why I can’t believe we are having this conversation.

I came from the military, where I couldn't even spell union. I was ignorant (as in uniformed, but still capable of rational thought) about all sorts of labor issues...and still am. I learn a ton from these boards. I'm happy to see some of these productivity and job-loss issues getting hashed out; regional pilots have been exposed to many more discussions about them than your average military pilot.

I don't "need" to do anything...I do what I can to advocate for what I believe are pro-pilot and pro-union positions. My opinions are nothing more than that. If they or my delivery trigger you, so be it. But thanks for the marital advice... very helpful!

Goggles,
So is it then in your eyes problimatic to white slip? What about a green slip? Are you not “taking” a potential job away by doing that? I’m being sarcastic or maybe to you I’m not but if by me wanting to pick up some flying is “stealing” jobs then we’re not looking at this through the same lense. By that logic Let’s just staff up to 20k Pilots for staffing sake. ALPA will love it since they just added 6k more unions dues.but that has unintended consequences as well. That in turn harms us because if you look at it in it’s ultimate conclusion Deltas over bloated balance sheets (labor is the highest cost) would cause distrucive $ loss resulting most likely in a furlough come an economic downturn
So imo yes we should have the ability to have efficient staffing where we can drop/pickup as we like ( which we do at the moment) fleet depending which is an amazing QOL choice. I never said let’s just make FAR’s as they are as the limitation I’ll even agree that maybe a 90 max flight time be a limit. (Again not for bidding but for picking up trips)
I think in the end it’s almost zero sum. Some months I’ll drop trips because I want the time off. That is possible because at the same time someone else is willing to pick up my trip. I wanted to pick up a “qualified” two day trip later in the month (some one out there needs that off) I’m willing to pick it. Win win. Nope. Now it’ll go to a reserve guy who probably would have had that reserve day at home with his family, or the pilot trying to drop it will have to work it. So tell me how is that a fair deal in the end.

Call the pilot with the qualified trip in open time and have him put it on the swap board. Problem solved.
I can assure you that when the limits are raised a high percentage of pilots will fly to those limits. The job loss will be staggering if we fly to FAR’s.

Sailing,
That’s a great idea. I’ll remeber that going forward. However I don’t want to swap my 4 day for a 2 day since that doesn’t really help in this case.
Trust me I totally see your point. And I’ll even concede in that I agree it can cause harm. I just wish there was some middle ground here. That’s mostly my point.

We are already in the middle ground. We granted massive productivity concessions to the company from 99 through 2005. We have clawed back a percentage of that but nothing near where we once were. To put it into perspective the work rules back then produced a average block hour total per pilot around 600 hours per year. I believe that number is currently around 800 hours per year. We have increased productivity on the order of 25%. The 800 hour number is from around 2016 so may be slightly lower with this contract. Still the job loss has been massive.
Our current productivity puts us inline with AMR and UAL but well below SWA. We really don’t want to become SWA. If you’re in the bottom 2000 on the seniority list you might wind up on the street.

What we have now strikes a reasonable balance. Allowing pilots to fly to FAR's would decimate jobs -- and upgrades.

Ok, all good points.This discussion probably blew up more than I expected. I’m not that die hard for this as much as it appears. It would be nice for me to pick up more flying when I wish but if where we are today is far better than where we used to be then it’s a great first world problem. I certainly hope though that this remains. I’m not the kind of person that believes in limiting our abilities to fly more so we can just grow the list. That is also a disservice to the current workforce. If that is something you guys can at least acknowledge then I think we are on the same page. Good discussion.

I think we are in the middle ground. Specifically, you can pull from swap board up to FAR limits if so desired.

Not to be a math geek, but 600 to 800 is a 33% increase. Makes your point even more.

Great discussion with good points by all.Thanks for keeping it civil fellas.

Scoop :)

And yet the more productive we are the MORE we have hired. Which really emphasizes in a capitalist system it is profits and not formulas that lead to prosperity and hiring and jobs.

I kind of like what we have now. I surely don't want to fly more, but going back to hard caps is not necessarily as cut and dried a job creator as some might think.