notEnuf

That’s not the business philosophy. The optimizer efficiency is driving the business decisions. I don’t like it either but this is the way management has decided to run the business. The 321 has taken 757 flying, the 330 has taken ER flying. The only way you can build a rotation efficiently is to bounce around the system. Again I don’t like it but how do you change that and at what negotiating cost? I don’t have answers. I guess I have just come to accept it because of the speed of change.

JamesBond

I thought you were about QOL?

notEnuf

I am but changing the business philosophy is a losing endeavor. Personally, I’d like to see the shorter domestic trips return. The fact that the RCC has no real effect means we have to concentrate on winning the battles that are winnable. In my mind that's vacation pay and accrual and time off. The job will always allow for more flying (at least for the foreseeable future) so my focus is on maintaining choice. Do I choose to fly more or am I forced to fly more by ALV, TLV and trip (only long, few short) construction. If I’m at work, then I’m at work, I don’t really care where I fly and from which base because domestically there’s a 50/50 chance of reroute if anything in the system isn’t running at optimum. As for international, the destinations are more important to people. I get it, but again, what’s the fix?

JamesBond

Me keeping the international flying that originates IN MY BASE is a no brainer.

The fix is simple. "If the international flight originates in a domicile and the category exists in that domicile, it goes to those pilots based there." Period.

What cracks me up is how we constantly hear how expensive New York is for hotels, yet the company has zero problem laying over guys from all over to fly our trips. I guess they ain't that ****ing expensive after all.

And the business philosophy isn't my concern. We are talking about our contract, and our QOL. I didn't bid NY 7ER to fly nothing but transcons at 30% When I checked out on the fleet the **** trip was DUB. Now I can't sniff DUB unless it is a holiday. And tbh, it is the FO side of the house that this is affecting waaaaaay more than the Captain side. And I agree about shorter domestic trips as well.

Denny Crane

JB

I think you are tilting at windmills to get that change.

Denny

OOfff

Looking at NYC7ER awards shows a ton of LIS, KEF, BRU, AMS, etc going junior to the 30% mark.
🤷🏽*♀️

notEnuf

I could support this. What's the value in a negotiation and will the company change to accommodate this type of language are the only remaining questions. I doubt they will change because they have an addiction to flexibility and capacity control. I think the ER is just going to continue to lose Europe, it's already been kicked out of the Pacific and the SEA and LAX bases have to do something. DUB will be on the A321neo soon anyway. If you want any real international variety bid ATL. The company obviously disagrees with your vision of base flying and ownership. Eventually we will all be doing LHR, CDG, and AMS with no real variety. Was this on the survey, I don't recall. Like everyone keeps telling me on my pet issues, "if it's the will of the people..." if not, sorry.

Kjazz130

Productivity could be VB’s, increased ALV’s/TLV’s, changing reserve flying to ALV+20, paybanding, longer freezes, or taking out PWA restriction and flying to FAR limits. All possibilities, none that I would support, but there are ways of making us more productive.

notEnuf

This is what I'm saying. I don't see any of these passing a vote, or even getting into a TA for that matter.

80ktsClamp

The 321NEOs at this point are not planned for transatlantic. First 20 will be ETOPS for Hawaii, and the next batch will not be ETOPS and configured for premium transcon.