Gone Flying

now we are talking. We should have as many shiny buttons as we can possibly cram on to one jacket, and then a few more on the hat and pants for good measure.

LumberJack

Buttondundancy

Hrkdrivr

I completely agree! We’ll see what the Uniform Survey results showed. Or we won’t. And the company will make changes. Or they won’t. I’m betting on the latter.

We’re pilots, we *****. It’s what we do, I get that.

I was mostly responding to Marcal’s ridiculous assertion the company should compensate pilots for pay lost due to being forbidden from doing outside flying.

Gone Flying

I get what you are saying WRT outside flying, but as someone who only wears the hat because they absolutely have to, and would love to see that policy changed, I could not resist poking fun at you using that as an example of “this is what you signed up for”

given the fact I was a no hat/leather jacket type (Karbon jacket would have been even better) before DL, I’m surprised they even called 😂

gloopy

LOLwut?

If anything they're too permissive. The company has no obligation to allow outside flying when it faces FAR limits for what you can do. Any outside civilian flying it allows is at its discrection as it should be unless you're facing imminent furlough, a UNA or some other special case.

marcal

I think both you and Herkflyer are missing my point. If the company says no to outside flying, I FIRMLY believe they should have to compensate you. They are inherently restricting your one trade. Flying airplanes. If they want to monopolize that, they should be forced to compensate you. I'm not advocating for whether they should allow it or not. I for one would not fly outside because the inherent risk(accident/violation) is much too great. But for those that want to and have fulfilled their obligation to Delta(flying a line within the LCW, or being available on reserve, Delta should not be allowed to simply say no with no recourse.

I'm saying that ONLY IN THE EVENT THEY SAY NO, they should have to compensate.

For instance, I know a guy who wanted to do some CFI work outside. He was straight up told no with no explanation. If he is entirely responsible for FAR117, etc. Why should Delta be able to park him and not compensate him for his potential loss of income from acting as a CFI? I told him he should send Delta a bill for his lost income.(Tongue in cheek)

marcal

Please see my post to Gloopy below. There is nothing ridiculous about allowing a company to monopolize your trade without compensating for it when they restrict it. If you fly your line/reserve and can fall within FAR117 with your outside flying, I personally believe the company should have no right to restrict you and if they do, they should have to compensate you.

I'm only talking about when they say you can't. Flying airplanes is our only trade. If they restrict it, how is that fair at all?

By the way, I have personally been approved in the past but that was a long time ago. At this point, I would never fly outside bc they risk of incident/accident/violation is to great to jeopardize this job.

OOfff

They…umm…do compensate us

gloopy

Yeah I'm trying to see the logical foundation for this absolute interpretation and its just not taking shape.

OOfff

If you want to prohibit me from working for another *insert firm here,* you should compensate me for my every waking moment! And I only sleep 6 hours a night!