|
|
Originally Posted by orvil
(Post 1202782)
You should hear me cuss in the cockpit. Oops, flight deck.
|
Originally Posted by CVG767A
(Post 1202787)
As a native of New Jersey, I can raise foul language to an art form. I don't speak rudely to my crew, though.
|
Originally Posted by orvil
(Post 1202786)
Now, in the spirit of being reasonable. I don't accept the 45 hour number for reserves as the complete number. It's too broad in it's sweep. The reserve utilization number needs to be broken down by fleet. I'm willing to bet that the domestic narrow body fleets are much better utilized than the long haul international fleets. The numbers are probably pretty startling.
The ALV+15 is designed to address the long haul international flying. In the process we may get unintended consequences in the domestic narrowbody operation. It's too late, but I think the operations should have been broken into two sets of rules. We are trying to put a square peg into a round hole and ending up with a mess. I'll be the first to admit that I know nothing of reserve, and, accordingly, I've refrained from commenting on it (with the exception of answering one simple question). Do I believe that the company wants these changes for international categories with long trips? Yes. Do I think that Crew Schedules will run with every loophole they are granted. YES. As a guy that isn't on reserve, and probably never will be again, I'm going to leave leave this discussion to those that will be affected by it. |
I sat alert in the Air Force flying nukes. 10 minute response time from alert klaxon to takeoff. Does that count as short call? We sat it one week at a time.
|
Originally Posted by Jack Bauer
(Post 1202785)
I've said it before and I will say it again.... JUST SAY NO!
Painful as it may be, I'm afraid its too late. History tells us that if it passes the MEC its going to be ratified. Roughly 60-40. The communications machinery and the inertia are just too much. The opposition can't match it. There isn't time. According to the MEC's own Policy Manual we're supposed to get 60 days to consider this TA. We're only getting 30. There's a reason for that. |
Originally Posted by Sobchak
(Post 1202747)
I heard the DTW reps were not invited to their own roadshow. You think it'll be a sales job?
|
Originally Posted by bigbusdriver
(Post 1202807)
I heard both the voting reps show off days on their schedules.
|
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 1202796)
Jack-
Painful as it may be, I'm afraid its too late. History tells us that if it passes the MEC its going to be ratified. Roughly 60-40. The communications machinery and the inertia are just too much. The opposition can't match it. There isn't time. According to the MEC's own Policy Manual we're supposed to get 60 days to consider this TA. We're only getting 30. There's a reason for that. And what was the reasoning TT of C20 gave again? It was two reasons: 1) To allow the pay raises to take effect July 1. 2) To allow more time to negotiate if needed. |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 1202812)
And what was the reasoning TT of C20 gave again? It was two reasons: 1) To allow the pay raises to take effect July 1. 2) To allow more time to negotiate if needed.
2) More time to negotiate if needed? I thought we were stuck with the NMB 3 year plan if we vote this down? I wish they had followed the Policy Manual. Even though it probably wouldn't affect the outcome. |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 1202810)
I was told they had prior commitments that they could not get out of. Nothing nefarious there.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:53 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands