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.

 

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.