Next AE: March-April 2019
01-14-2019, 05:17 AM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MadDog gear slinger
Posts: 568
Originally Posted by MJP27
I知 sure M88Bs will disagree. It値l be rats jumping off a sinking ship.
Last edited by Flying Monkey; 01-14-2019 at 05:35 AM.
01-14-2019, 05:26 AM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,100
Originally Posted by MJP27
I知 sure M88Bs will disagree. It値l be rats jumping off a sinking ship.
01-14-2019, 05:40 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,261
Originally Posted by Delta2heavy
You don稚 think 25 350 spots will create any movement? Also as far as the lax 320 base... crew resources never said anything about opening that on this one. They always said April. That was some rumor someone made up and everyone went with it
I believe the ae in April is the first one where we will see sustained upward movement for years
I believe the ae in April is the first one where we will see sustained upward movement for years
01-14-2019, 06:38 AM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,117
Originally Posted by 3 green
Another AE that really has no movement involved..
Further, if, as the AE letter says, those 170 positions replace unbid positions from the November AE, has CR thereby lost the ability to avail itself of 22.E.10 and give those positions to new hires because they chose to put them out for bid again but then state they will not award all 170 positions?
01-14-2019, 06:54 AM
#39
Super Moderator
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,545
Originally Posted by Delta2heavy
You don稚 think 25 350 spots will create any movement?
Originally Posted by Han Solo
I'm interested to see how much movement the 25 350a creates. It all depends on the back-fill.
Originally Posted by FL370esq
I'm intrigued by the comment following the posting of the 170 73N F/O vacancies - where CR says that they will not award all the positions posted because their objective is to minimize the training demand as much as possible. Huh???? Why post 170 positions then?
Further, if, as the AE letter says, those 170 positions replace unbid positions from the November AE, has CR thereby lost the ability to avail itself of 22.E.10 and give those positions to new hires because they chose to put them out for bid again but then state they will not award all 170 positions?
Further, if, as the AE letter says, those 170 positions replace unbid positions from the November AE, has CR thereby lost the ability to avail itself of 22.E.10 and give those positions to new hires because they chose to put them out for bid again but then state they will not award all 170 positions?
01-14-2019, 06:55 AM
#40
Back on Reserve
Joined APC: Dec 2012
Position: A330 FO
Posts: 669
Originally Posted by FL370esq
I'm intrigued by the comment following the posting of the 170 73N F/O vacancies - where CR says that they will not award all the positions posted because their objective is to minimize the training demand as much as possible. Huh???? Why post 170 positions then?
Further, if, as the AE letter says, those 170 positions replace unbid positions from the November AE, has CR thereby lost the ability to avail itself of 22.E.10 and give those positions to new hires because they chose to put them out for bid again but then state they will not award all 170 positions?
Further, if, as the AE letter says, those 170 positions replace unbid positions from the November AE, has CR thereby lost the ability to avail itself of 22.E.10 and give those positions to new hires because they chose to put them out for bid again but then state they will not award all 170 positions?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
