Contract 2026
10-20-2025 | 04:23 AM
#501
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 12,481
Likes: 1,055
Hey, why not just have a seniority assignment before an inverse assignment? Let the pilots who Auto Accept and Auto Acknowledge go and fly the trips they've accepted and acknowledged in seniority order. Just put it on their line. If they need to use the proffer, then they call in (or electronically indicate) that they've made a mistake (child care, forgot and drank a beer, whatever) but 99% of the time just go fly the trip the pilot has AA and AA.
Our ***ASSOCIATION ****ED UP*** by allowing 23 M. 7. and now that the Association's action has proved unpopular with line pilots who are getting screwed we have some "powerful people" thinking they can decide what an unfair deal is and "take action against a pilot." ... wait, isn't that management's job, to discipline pilots?
So, a Rep writes he will "take action against pilots." I have questions.
Better yet, let us just fix the problem that the association's agreement with management created, please.
Our ***ASSOCIATION ****ED UP*** by allowing 23 M. 7. and now that the Association's action has proved unpopular with line pilots who are getting screwed we have some "powerful people" thinking they can decide what an unfair deal is and "take action against a pilot." ... wait, isn't that management's job, to discipline pilots?
So, a Rep writes he will "take action against pilots." I have questions.
Better yet, let us just fix the problem that the association's agreement with management created, please.
10-20-2025 | 04:25 AM
#502
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 244
Likes: 7
Could be done a couple different ways. You don't get M7#2 until everyone else on the callout list gets M7#1. Or you could just say that they don't get another M7 over the footprint of the trip they've already received M7. This makes the most sense because you were made whole for the entirety of that footprint and wouldn't have been to get anything else if you had flown it anyway.
Your posed scenario is different than when you accept an less desirable GS then an hour later a much better GS pops...you already made your bed, cost of doing business.
I don't disagree, but you crap in one hand....you know the rest.
Your posed scenario is different than when you accept an less desirable GS then an hour later a much better GS pops...you already made your bed, cost of doing business.
I don't disagree, but you crap in one hand....you know the rest.
10-20-2025 | 04:27 AM
#503
Moderator
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,436
Likes: 438
A senior pilot who passes up a 1 day GS to wait for a 3-4 day GS is done by their choosing. The company going straight to the A code is not the pilots choice, so the senior pilot shouldn’t get the 1 day payout while the junior guys get the multi day payout. The no overlapping footprint/pay seems like a better angle than a straight up counter…
Ah I see what you're saying now, yes that's a great point. I agree that the overlapping footprint thing is the best option.
10-20-2025 | 04:28 AM
#504
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 12,481
Likes: 1,055
A senior pilot who passes up a 1 day GS to wait for a 3-4 day GS is done by their choosing. The company going straight to the A code is not the pilots choice, so the senior pilot shouldn’t get the 1 day payout while the junior guys get the multi day payout. The no overlapping footprint/pay seems like a better angle than a straight up counter…
10-20-2025 | 04:39 AM
#505
Line Holder
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 1,301
Likes: 42
Maybe I’m missing something…but how is this a problem for the company. They are still filling the trip. WE are the ones that seem to have the problem.
10-20-2025 | 04:40 AM
#506
Moderator
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,436
Likes: 438
How many times in the history of the airline do you think that's happened, or would happen? Even over Christmas, I've been #75 on the list. Worst case, throw it into a pot that gets distributed to the pilot group at the end of the year. Best case, it ends up being a joke of a payment that buys a coffee or something.
10-20-2025 | 04:49 AM
#507
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 244
Likes: 7
Back to hypotheticals with the “counter” idea, which I think we agree isn’t the best fix…
Let’s say #1 has a WS in for a 1 day and is looking for a 3-4 day GS at some point in the month. CS decides to use the A function on the 1 day, so #1 gets paid 23M7 for the WS but later in the month they also use the A code at the GS step and now #1 misses the 3-4 day GS, but somebody junior gets paid because #1 already got 23M7#1. Unfortunately, the company choosing to go to the A Code isn’t the pilots choice and senior should still be paid for both of these…unless overlapping…😅
Ok, I feel like I beat the dead horse on the counter now 😅
10-20-2025 | 05:11 AM
#508
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2021
Posts: 1,235
Likes: 345
We (pilots) do have a problem here, and that's with the deal making. None of us should be doing it, and so long as the few dealmakers keep doing it, the company is incentivized to continue with that strategy.
10-20-2025 | 05:21 AM
#509
Moderator
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 8,231
Likes: 1,196
I am seeing this 23M7 counter idea making the rounds, but how exactly will it work? Let’s say the 1st 23M7 payout is a 5:15 and goes to the #1 guy and then there is a 2nd 23M7 payout for 15:45…now that would go to #2 eventhough #1 got skipped again? Will #1 be able to go back and say I want the 15:45 I was skipped for and give #2 the 5:15? Management should probably just fix their trip coverage problem…
I also don't think simply/only excluding M7#2 during the footprint of M7#1 is the answer either (I actually thought that was already the case), because the senior folks will still gobble up non-stop 1 days.
IMO, we should never have a system that allows the top page pilots to sit at home collecting 120-150 hours of pay a month for doing nothing more than updating iCrew WS templates once per day. I absolutely think they should be able to take any trip they actually want to fly, but the pay penalties should be peanut-butter spread down the seniority list.
Heck, why not consider requiring the 23M7 violations go into a jar that every pilot in category gets a share of every month? The super senior are going to howl regardless of the solution...
10-20-2025 | 05:41 AM
#510
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 12,481
Likes: 1,055
Here is the thing, if the Senior pilot doesn't want to "waste" his M7#1 on a 1-day trip, don't put in a proffer WS in for a 1-day trip. If you want to fish for free money, only put in for 3/4/5 day trips. zero sympathy here.
I also don't think simply/only excluding M7#2 during the footprint of M7#1 is the answer either (I actually thought that was already the case), because the senior folks will still gobble up non-stop 1 days.
IMO, we should never have a system that allows the top page pilots to sit at home collecting 120-150 hours of pay a month for doing nothing more than updating iCrew WS templates once per day. I absolutely think they should be able to take any trip they actually want to fly, but the pay penalties should be peanut-butter spread down the seniority list.
Heck, why not consider requiring the 23M7 violations go into a jar that every pilot in category gets a share of every month? The super senior are going to howl regardless of the solution...
I also don't think simply/only excluding M7#2 during the footprint of M7#1 is the answer either (I actually thought that was already the case), because the senior folks will still gobble up non-stop 1 days.
IMO, we should never have a system that allows the top page pilots to sit at home collecting 120-150 hours of pay a month for doing nothing more than updating iCrew WS templates once per day. I absolutely think they should be able to take any trip they actually want to fly, but the pay penalties should be peanut-butter spread down the seniority list.
Heck, why not consider requiring the 23M7 violations go into a jar that every pilot in category gets a share of every month? The super senior are going to howl regardless of the solution...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
