Massive 350A Bypass
#101
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2006
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 2,370
Sooo...banding 319/320 to 737-7/800s rates will free up gobs of training while stagnating seniority on the 320 cuz "now guys won't leave the 320 to fly the 737"? Close to nobody chooses to leave the 320 -> 737 just for $10hr on some variants. It's usually for trip quality, layovers, seniority%, etc.
319/320 should pay the same as the 737-700/800. Change my mind.
319/320 should pay the same as the 737-700/800. Change my mind.
#102
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2016
Posts: 2,544
Yeah, but they maintain total control of the airplane instead of being overridden by a computer. They don’t have to listen to fifi call them names. They don’t have to worry about thrust levers that move NO WHERE on their own. Plus, the tray table has too many settings and how am I supposed to choose where to put it?
#103
#104
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 381
Crazy, huh?
It looks weird because the Company only elected to fill 13 of the 14 posted vacancies (although one pilot exited the category so a total of 14 entered the category). The youngest pilot bypassed had an 11/2021 retirement date and a seniority # of 410 putting him/her pretty high on the list (#17 from the top and well before the first vacancy was even awarded). Therefore, his/her retirement date controlled the bypasses for this AE.
When the sen# 2376 pilot was awarded the the 14th of 15 vacancies (14 posted plus one contingent vacancy), there was still one more vacancy that could have been awarded. The next pilot with an AE (the 2400 sen#) was slated to retire in the conversion window so the Commodore 64 kept on plugging. The next pilot with an AE (2500 sen#) had a retirement date before 11/2021 so the exception to 22.E.13.b applied and that pilot was bypassed. The next pilot who could have filled the last vacancy had a retirement date after 11/2021 and therefore would not have been bypassed. For whatever reason though, the Company elected not to fill that last vacancy when they got to an eligible pilot. As a result, "technically" those last two pilots could have held that last vacancy but they were bypassed instead.
It looks weird because the Company only elected to fill 13 of the 14 posted vacancies (although one pilot exited the category so a total of 14 entered the category). The youngest pilot bypassed had an 11/2021 retirement date and a seniority # of 410 putting him/her pretty high on the list (#17 from the top and well before the first vacancy was even awarded). Therefore, his/her retirement date controlled the bypasses for this AE.
When the sen# 2376 pilot was awarded the the 14th of 15 vacancies (14 posted plus one contingent vacancy), there was still one more vacancy that could have been awarded. The next pilot with an AE (the 2400 sen#) was slated to retire in the conversion window so the Commodore 64 kept on plugging. The next pilot with an AE (2500 sen#) had a retirement date before 11/2021 so the exception to 22.E.13.b applied and that pilot was bypassed. The next pilot who could have filled the last vacancy had a retirement date after 11/2021 and therefore would not have been bypassed. For whatever reason though, the Company elected not to fill that last vacancy when they got to an eligible pilot. As a result, "technically" those last two pilots could have held that last vacancy but they were bypassed instead.
#105
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,117
I’m confused as to what these two guys gain by being bypassed. Doesn’t the pay protection (ie moving up to 350 pay) only start once someone junior to them converts? If no one junior was awarded the position, there’s no one junior to convert and therefore no trigger for the pay increase. What am I missing here?
#106
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 381
You are confusing bypass with the pay protection provision of 22.E.9. A bypassed pilot does not require training so he/she does not trigger pay protection for senior pilots. Basically, those two will convert in seniority order and receive A350 Capt pay from their conversion date thru retirement. Worst case scenario (latest possible conversion), the bottom pilot will receive A350 Captain pay for roughly 11 months while flying as a MSP320 Captain.
#107
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,117
I see. 22.E.13 says they get the pay protection at the higher rate when they would have converted. I think that is determined when someone junior to them converts or in the case of these guys with no one junior to them it would happen at the end of the conversation window.
#108
Sooo...banding 319/320 to 737-7/800s rates will free up gobs of training while stagnating seniority on the 320 cuz "now guys won't leave the 320 to fly the 737"? Close to nobody chooses to leave the 320 -> 737 just for $10hr on some variants. It's usually for trip quality, layovers, seniority%, etc.
319/320 should pay the same as the 737-700/800. Change my mind.
319/320 should pay the same as the 737-700/800. Change my mind.
#109
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2013
Position: A350 Captain (RET)
Posts: 149
Yeah, but they maintain total control of the airplane instead of being overridden by a computer. They don’t have to listen to fifi call them names. They don’t have to worry about thrust levers that move NO WHERE on their own. Plus, the tray table has too many settings and how am I supposed to choose where to put it?
Yes, it is scary not seeing the power levers move but actually seeing what the engines are doing.. like accelerating or decelerating.
And that modern technology thingy... what were they thinking when they designed a flight deck for today's environment! How dumb was it for Airbus to consult the folks from Saab to provide an ergonomically inviting cockpit. Shesh....Autobrake selection near the landing gear!!! Boy was that stupid, it should be hidden somewhere on the center console!
You are right about that tray table. I prefer to eat my meals with my plate in my lap... sort of reminds me of camping with the kids.
Airbus sucks...
Fly safe,
OC
#110
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2018
Posts: 3,191
I think most would agree, the thrust levels moving provides a very useful peripheral secondary que as to engine setting/trend...like possibly approach to stall at high altitude and increasing temp situations.
I also think a yoke provides the same secondary que....and would be safer........but I certainly don't want to give up my tray table for that pesky yoke and a slightly safer cockpit
Calling a spade a spade.....just because it's Airbus doesn't mean it's ALL better. Don't want a yoke in the interest of safety but think thrust lever movement would be an idea worth considering
JMHO
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post