Next AE: March-April 2019
#691
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: Petting Zoo
Posts: 2,074
There was at least one 88 FO SLI who was an 88A. He made the choice he made. His option what seat he wanted to fly/bid at, but pay is the same. Choice ain't a bad thing I think, either way PWA allows it.
#692
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 794
I don't really see a problem with it. It is a very small minority.
#693
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,522
No, on their fly months they bid as a captain at their current seniority. The one I have met who does it is about 10 from the bottom of ATL 320A. It was perplexing to me, that they would want to do that for the same pay and worse seniority, but I think a big part of it is that they get to fly with their favorite captain on every trip. Also, they are accruing block hours as a captain which could translate into a different job in the training department.
I don't really see a problem with it. It is a very small minority.
I don't really see a problem with it. It is a very small minority.
#694
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,273
The problem is having Captains fly at FO pay. That's rediculous and we shouldn't allow it. It might be acceptable if another CA was bought off and then the FO pay Captain was over and above that (I'm still not crazy about it though) but no one should be able to take a month's worth of CA time at FO pay.
#695
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,522
How would that be a pay cut? And other than someone wanting to log PIC time for their resume, what advantage is it to the pilot group to allow Captains to fly for FO pay?
If there was some very narrow technicallity where that was the case, then it could be fixed by saying they could only fly as FO for FO pay (777 pay for almost all of them anyway right?)
#696
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Posts: 794
What B position pays more than the same longevity step A position? Don't count the RJ's and E-jets that have pay tables but aren't on property.
How would that be a pay cut? And other than someone wanting to log PIC time for their resume, what advantage is it to the pilot group to allow Captains to fly for FO pay?
If there was some very narrow technicallity where that was the case, then it could be fixed by saying they could only fly as FO for FO pay (777 pay for almost all of them anyway right?)
How would that be a pay cut? And other than someone wanting to log PIC time for their resume, what advantage is it to the pilot group to allow Captains to fly for FO pay?
If there was some very narrow technicallity where that was the case, then it could be fixed by saying they could only fly as FO for FO pay (777 pay for almost all of them anyway right?)
#698
Doing Nothing
Joined APC: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,316
#699
Super Moderator
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 6,868
#700
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,504
What B position pays more than the same longevity step A position? Don't count the RJ's and E-jets that have pay tables but aren't on property.
How would that be a pay cut? And other than someone wanting to log PIC time for their resume, what advantage is it to the pilot group to allow Captains to fly for FO pay?
If there was some very narrow technicallity where that was the case, then it could be fixed by saying they could only fly as FO for FO pay (777 pay for almost all of them anyway right?)
How would that be a pay cut? And other than someone wanting to log PIC time for their resume, what advantage is it to the pilot group to allow Captains to fly for FO pay?
If there was some very narrow technicallity where that was the case, then it could be fixed by saying they could only fly as FO for FO pay (777 pay for almost all of them anyway right?)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post