Reserve for Dummies
01-22-2025 | 12:09 AM
#3031
Line Holder
Joined: Mar 2019
Posts: 1,427
Likes: 169
Decided to just fly it as I needed it eventually anyway (initial captain upgrade check) but taking that long to get paid was ridiculous.
01-22-2025 | 01:03 AM
#3032
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 525
Likes: 25
From: 320
01-22-2025 | 04:56 AM
#3033
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,615
Likes: 633
01-22-2025 | 02:55 PM
#3034
Banned
Joined: Feb 2022
Posts: 874
Likes: 0
it needs to show on our actual pay stub, that way we know we were actually paid for it. Had something grieved in April and was “paid” for it in August…. Didn’t see sh** on my pay stub indicating I was paid for it. Just a lump sum for flight pay and you have to figure the rest out sifting through your PAS, Icrew, Paystubs. Pain in the ass. Still don’t know if I was paid, the company said they paid me.. and this violates California laws, I’m sure. Crazy ALPA isn’t all over this even more
Last edited by 170Till5; 01-22-2025 at 03:25 PM.
01-22-2025 | 03:25 PM
#3035
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2021
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 375
The theoretical SC isn't assigned yet and I think they would not be eligible the day prior. I think this is a non issue but the OP is trying to get ahead of the potential issue. I have been assigned SC but wasn't legal (30/168) to fly anything. A RAP is not a flight assignment.
Theoretically you CAN be legally assigned a SC that complies with 30/168, within which you become illegal for an FDP due to 30/168.
From that SC RAP you could be assigned a rotation with a DH-only duty period (no limitation for 30/168 for a DH-only duty period) to a layover that gives 30 hours rest and fly an FDP after. I believe this rarely happens, but it is concievable.
IMO this is one of the many reasons why the coverage ladder is so critically important, so the company can't custom-build a trip that takes advantage of this type of scenario to snipe on a particularly vulnerable pilot.
01-23-2025 | 04:43 AM
#3036
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 4,008
Likes: 211
From: Looking left
Quoting this from a few pages back as reference, but just wanted to add the following.
Theoretically you CAN be legally assigned a SC that complies with 30/168, within which you become illegal for an FDP due to 30/168.
From that SC RAP you could be assigned a rotation with a DH-only duty period (no limitation for 30/168 for a DH-only duty period) to a layover that gives 30 hours rest and fly an FDP after. I believe this rarely happens, but it is concievable.
IMO this is one of the many reasons why the coverage ladder is so critically important, so the company can't custom-build a trip that takes advantage of this type of scenario to snipe on a particularly vulnerable pilot.
Theoretically you CAN be legally assigned a SC that complies with 30/168, within which you become illegal for an FDP due to 30/168.
From that SC RAP you could be assigned a rotation with a DH-only duty period (no limitation for 30/168 for a DH-only duty period) to a layover that gives 30 hours rest and fly an FDP after. I believe this rarely happens, but it is concievable.
IMO this is one of the many reasons why the coverage ladder is so critically important, so the company can't custom-build a trip that takes advantage of this type of scenario to snipe on a particularly vulnerable pilot.
For example, you start SC at noon, run out of 30/168 lookback at 1300, get assigned rotation that reports at 1400…still legal even thought the FDP start after 30/168
01-23-2025 | 05:24 AM
#3037
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2021
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 375
I don’t think that’s true…it used to be a few years back but ALPA came out with a different interpretation. If you are legal to start the RAP, then you are legal to start/finish an FDP that occurs within that RAP.
For example, you start SC at noon, run out of 30/168 lookback at 1300, get assigned rotation that reports at 1400…still legal even thought the FDP start after 30/168
For example, you start SC at noon, run out of 30/168 lookback at 1300, get assigned rotation that reports at 1400…still legal even thought the FDP start after 30/168
Out of curiosity I also asked why the other pilot was even assigned SC in the first place if they were basically unusable for an actual FDP. CS told me that the automated short call assignments do not check for 30/168. Additionally they thanked me for pointing out that the other pilot was basically unusable now and they would go ahead and put him into rest.
Last edited by Verdell; 01-23-2025 at 05:38 AM.
01-23-2025 | 06:19 AM
#3038
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 4,008
Likes: 211
From: Looking left
I think it is true, and by example a couple months ago I was the #2 available SC pilot in the exact same SC window/days of availability. I was given a trip (#1 was skipped over). I called CS and they said what I posted above, he was legal for DH-only but not for the FDP that was given to me. I submitted an STS and the ALPA response was exactly what I posted above. Not legal for the FDP, but was legal for the SC and/or a DH-only duty period.
Out of curiosity I also asked why the other pilot was even assigned SC in the first place if they were basically unusable for an actual FDP. CS told me that the automated short call assignments do not check for 30/168. Additionally they thanked me for pointing out that the other pilot was basically unusable now and they would go ahead and put him into rest.
Out of curiosity I also asked why the other pilot was even assigned SC in the first place if they were basically unusable for an actual FDP. CS told me that the automated short call assignments do not check for 30/168. Additionally they thanked me for pointing out that the other pilot was basically unusable now and they would go ahead and put him into rest.
I know it’s not an official source but the Ex Chair of the Sched Committee SK has stated numerous times on the widget Sched FB page that ALPA’s stance is legal to start the RAP legal to finish it, including any FDP that is assigned during the RAP.
DL Sched tried to tell me I was legal to sit SC even though I was expired for CQ, so I don’t trust anything they say.
STS goes to ALPA scheduling…I would highly recommend talking to DALPA 117 hotline specifically to see why they say since they are the SME in this area.
01-23-2025 | 05:42 PM
#3039
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 922
Likes: 81
From: B737 FO
DH isn’t an FDP, so don’t need 30/168 for that.
I know it’s not an official source but the Ex Chair of the Sched Committee SK has stated numerous times on the widget Sched FB page that ALPA’s stance is legal to start the RAP legal to finish it, including any FDP that is assigned during the RAP.
DL Sched tried to tell me I was legal to sit SC even though I was expired for CQ, so I don’t trust anything they say.
STS goes to ALPA scheduling…I would highly recommend talking to DALPA 117 hotline specifically to see why they say since they are the SME in this area.
I know it’s not an official source but the Ex Chair of the Sched Committee SK has stated numerous times on the widget Sched FB page that ALPA’s stance is legal to start the RAP legal to finish it, including any FDP that is assigned during the RAP.
DL Sched tried to tell me I was legal to sit SC even though I was expired for CQ, so I don’t trust anything they say.
STS goes to ALPA scheduling…I would highly recommend talking to DALPA 117 hotline specifically to see why they say since they are the SME in this area.
01-24-2025 | 02:44 AM
#3040
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 525
Likes: 25
From: 320
Thnks. Funny i've actually never clicked on that menu option before, only my time card. Either way, the 41FC pay code was dropped on a previous timecard that ive already been paid for. So to quality control me getting actually paid out for this, I guess i'd need to search current and future pay statements from Icrew and look for that pay code to show up at some point.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
