Originally Posted by dalad

Let's just wait til the block hour plan for next year comes out in October. I understand the frustration of the junior guys at the stagnation as I sat on the right seat of the Mud Pup for five + years in the early 90's. Me thinks (and that's just me) that hiring will be done this winter. If HND doesn't go our way I see HA as being in play, just look at their route map. ALK is only in play if someone else seems ready to make a move, read AMR. But, AMR can't even get out of their own way, with the creditors becoming impatient.

Originally Posted by Jack Bauer

Not aimed at you Denny but there are some on here who already got theirs, now pushing the chess pieces so they get even more their last few years and selling the jr guys with rah rah rah it's all a good deal.

Originally Posted by Roadkill

This, absolutely. All this economy talk is eyewash--nothing has changed since the TA was being sold and all the company strawmen were on here expounding on the upcoming hiring outlook. The reserve utilization giveback was an enormous blow to us, constantly justified by various posters as being "offset" by blah blah blah B S. Staffing is driven by the worst case reserve needs for Jul and Aug. We let them modify the days, and boost reserve ute from 68 hours to a potential 100ish, almost a 50% increase in utilization efficiency for our reserves... 20% of 11,500 is 2300 pilots; 50% increase in efficency of that group during Jul/aug is 1250 pilots.

That's what we bought with the TA, 1250 less pilots via reserve increase. Oh, of course reduced by the nebulous on no-data-to-support bogus claims of vacation, reserve now full, known absences count horse cr*p. I don't believe any of those claims, there has been no data given to support it... NONE of those gains matter in the slightest except for two critical months that drive hiring, Jul/Aug, and if you modify the "offset" claims to the months they actually have an effect, the impact of these offsets is minimal and no where near a full offset. And any pointing to a reserve hiring formula with 60 hours average use is likewise foolish misdirection as the non-factor months Sep thru May drive the average constantly below the hiring trigger--the hiring algorithm is hopelessly skewed to the point of being meaningless. My opinion without supporting data is at least as commanding as all the opposing opinions without supporting data.

And before all the TA cheerleaders channeling Bill Lumberg jump in, please... it's possible for someone to criticize one single aspect of the ta as being less than optimal without you demanding they "show me a better contract" etc... Show a little intellectual integrity and admit that this one area of the TA absolutely suckith, no matter WHAT mitigating other factors you perceive may exist.

+ BBar, +FrmFrtDog, -76drvr, -slowplay. And I'm starting to think Johnso is either running for office or his kid brother has taken over his account lately...

Originally Posted by Jesse

How many others were also told the fall AE would be HUGE? That's what I got from a DALPA member in the know when I was being told how the TA (reserve work rules part) would not result in a need for fewer pilots. Again, why did we even give up QOL issues in the TA when THEY CAME TO US????? Sad.

EDIT: Rhetorical Question. We all know the answer: Get what you can and let the juniors (in each category) pay for it.

Originally Posted by Maddoggin

Where is the implementation schedule for the new contract posted? I'm trying to find when the slight increase in vacation pay kicks in.

Thanks

Originally Posted by scambo1

PCIEE FO CKAE !

Wow! I've seen this with the letters out of order, but this is the first time I've seen it with numbers.
Good example of a Brain Study: If you can read this OUT LOUD you have a strong mind.
And better than that: Alzheimer’s is a long, long, ways down the road before it ever gets anywhere near you.

7H15 M3554G3
> 53RV35 7O PR0V3
> H0W 0UR M1ND5 C4N
> D0 4M4Z1NG 7H1NG5!
> 1MPR3551V3 7H1NG5!
> 1N 7H3 B3G1NN1NG
> 17 WA5 H4RD BU7
> N0W, 0N 7H15 LIN3
> Y0UR M1ND 1S
> R34D1NG 17
> 4U70M471C4LLY
> W17H 0U7 3V3N
> 7H1NK1NG 4B0U7 17,
> B3 PROUD! 0NLY
> C3R741N P30PL3 C4N
> R3AD 7H15.
> PL3453 F0RW4RD 1F
> U C4N R34D 7H15.
>
> To my 'selected' strange-minded friends:
>
>
> If you can read the following paragraph, forward it on to your friends and the person that sent it to you with 'yes' in the subject line. Only great minds can read this. This is weird, but interesting!
>
> If you can raed this, you have a sgtrane mnid, too.
>
> Can you raed this? Olny 55 plepoe out of 100 can. I cdnuolt blveiee that I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd what I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in what oerdr the ltteres in a word are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is that the frsit and last ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can still raed it whotuit a pboerlm. This is bcuseaethe huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the word as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? Yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt! If you can raed this forwrad it
>
> FORWARD ONLY IF YOU CAN READ IT
> Forward it & put 'YES' in the Subject Line
>
> Even if you are not old, you will find this interesting...
>
>
> Short Neurological Test
>
> 1- Find the C below.. Please do not use any cursor help.
>
> OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO​O
> OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO​O
> OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO​O
> OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO​O
> OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO​O
> OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO​O
> OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOO​O
> OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO​O
> OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO​O
> OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO​O
> OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO​O
>
> 2- If you already found the C, now find the 6 below.
>
> 99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
> 99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
> 99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
> 69999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
> 99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
> 99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
>
> 3 - Now find the N below.. It's a little more difficult.
>
> MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMNM​M
> MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM​M
> MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM​M
> MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM​M
> MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM​M
>
> This is NOT a joke. If you were able to pass these 3 tests, you can cancel your annual visit to your neurologist. Your brain is great and you're far from having a close relationship with Alzheimer..

Originally Posted by dalad

BB, I think something is up, that's all. And it isn"t the first drops of Jet-A out of Trainer. There are some unusual ALPA trip drops on the schedule for next month.

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar

The problem for those who decided to defend C2012 (which does not need defending) is that management will not keep its yap shut about the efficiencies created through increased utilization. On the other board, the Manager of Crew Planning was quoted pretty clearly that at an 82 hour ALV we are over staffed by 300 pilots..

Originally Posted by slowplay

Do you have any facts or recent history to support your position, or are you playing to your co-workers that are bigger suckers than those dumb rj pilots?

Here's some recent examples:

AFA at USAirways turned down their deal...it got worse. USAPA's governing body turned down their deal, and it got worse. While the final story hasn't been written, APA turned down their deal, and it got worse.

So in your world the "right" answer was to turn down the June 29 deal. You'd now be negotiating in an environment where AMR has 88 seat RJ scope (only using 79 seats at this time) imposed by the court. Nice.

You assert that the B717 were coming anyway, even though Delta management and ALPA told you there was a plan B. Isn't it strange that a Delta competitor "found" about half the number of used amall narrowbodies on the open market just a few short weeks after the TA was ratified. Or how about the capacity math that doesn't work for delivery of all 88 B717s without the deal? You trying to "sucker" somebody?