Originally Posted by forgot to bid

FTB, waiting in line at Popeyes in Terminal B...



WHY IS EVERYONE YELLING!?!?!

Originally Posted by Superdad

Am I the only who thinks this is one LOA that should not just be negotiated and signed without pilot input?

Contact your reps people, let them know that you want to be involved in this process before its signed without our knowledge!

Originally Posted by sailingfun

There are lots of things that will prevent what you think will happen. I am not worried about it. Even if they go to the 48 hour layover they run a much greater risk of getting the flight canceled. I have been told one jet laid down in Europe costs the company 250K. They will also have to pay both pilots credit for the extra day. On some trips the credit for the CA and FO would almost match the cost of just putting the extra pilot onboard. They also will require more reserves if they go to all 4 day trips and have fewer pilots available for GS or WS when weather wipes out NY. They would double their hotel costs. On top of all that as you mention are contract does not allow it.

Originally Posted by acl65pilot

Sailing,

First the 48 hr layo rule is one way to domesticate a pilot. It allows nine hrs of block. There are a few ways to reroute to efficiency on this sort of thing too. Yes, the nine hrs is hard time, and as you know as a NYC ER pilot there are many routes to JFK that fall well under that. A diversion is always a possibility, and one I would hope that DAL chooses to not make a major event by keeping IRO's on all flights over 8 hrs. It comes down to a math problem for their position and what they want from our PWA.

We can add a IRO when it looks like there is going to be a need on the Westbound leg; ie, NYC weather in two days, weather in Northern Europe ect. We could also DH that IRO over and they could put him up in Europe or Asia as a SC/LC pilot in our AMR and CDG ops plus a few other places. I would be watching for changes in the PWA that may allow that sort of thing.

You may say its outlandish, but rerouteing and out of the box thinking is exactly how this could be a jobs killer. Yes, the FT/DT is layered, but there are ways to make a pilot fly 9 hrs westbound. Yes, the current PWA prevents any ocean crossing over eight hrs from not going augmented, but that is a major ticket item. One that to me is not negotiable. We are currently protected from this, and IMO need to strengthen it. Ala the Caribbean turns.


Another front that concerns me is ULH pilot staffing. What does a 12+ hr flight via the FT/DT require versus what we staff on each of those flight? Could we see ULH rules that we currently enjoy changed? What could that do to staffing? Staffing in each seat?

The areas that could be jobs gainers are:

How we pay reserve pilots and rotation guarantee once assigned a trip. Reroutes will deal with many of the duty limit issues, and this is a sure fire way to make it net positive in that department.

We also are going to have to find a new normal wrt to the needed min time off per week that the FT/DT requires.

There are many nuggets that I am sure the scheduling and negotiation committee are looking at as areas that could cost pilots jobs, or pilot staffing gains. We just need to be very careful on what we agree to.

Originally Posted by Check Essential

I don't think they show up anywhere.
The only way to spot the swapping is to look at individual schedules.

Originally Posted by Elvis90

AA pilots' contract has been abrogated by the judge this afternoon.

Judge lets American Airlines toss out its pilots contract | Airline Biz Blog

Originally Posted by buzzpat

Yeah, I think you're right. That's convenient.

I hope this Oct 1 elimination of trip parking really works. I'm all for seniority being seniority, but trip parking is unethical and end runs the system.