One can't forget the role of poor hearing in the development and certification of the MD 88 ...

Chief Test Director, Douglas: "Take the system reliability data and ship it to the Feds"

What his Secretary Heard: "Take the system reliability data, rip it to shreds"

... it was just a misunderstanding ...

I will just confirm what MD88Driver said. According to Negotiators Note pad 12-12, contract implementation schedule, it begins with the 2013-2014 vacation year which begins April 1, 2013.

Denny

Not to change the subject and don't know if this has been posted before but I kinda liked it.....

http://www.youtube.com/v/RU1oB8sGyYM


Denny

Don't get your unmentionables in a bunch, it wasn't an attack. It only was a statement of the obvious: the best way to get a reaction from a rep, something you said you would love, is easily within your reach.

My rep says he's had little feedback on this issue except from a small numbers of us APC'ers.

That was cool Denny. Thanks for posting.

Jinks

So you're refuting your own point, but you don't want me to make this argument?

On the airplane, ONE person might get a visual of you, by sticking a phone in your face in the cockpit, but that would end up being a very short-lived activity. In a crowd at the gate house, ANY ONE passenger can get a nice visual of you making the announcement. And if the delay is bad enough, EVERYONE will want to be that person. It's not a question of whether you might make social media, but how many fb pages you'll make.

With all this said, I'm a little less excited about this after having discussed it in the "beyond-APC" world. Not that I'm denigrating APC, just that it's sometimes instructive to make phone calls.

I'm starting to think it might be smarter to see whether anything really changes before I get excited about it. If we get conflicts, and Flight Ops doesn't back us up, then we need to get real excited. FIIGMO made a good argument about how this sort of thing might play out.

Totally righteous Denny!

Before I take that bet, are you saying the company will never go after a pilot for not doing a newly required gatehouse/standup PA? Or are you saying merely that ALPA will never defend such a pilot in the first place?

It is a matter of time before word gets out to gate agents and FA's that DL pilots are now "required" to make stand up PA's to the pax. It is inevitable that some agents and FA's will think they have some level of authority over pilots and when they do not do as they are told, they will be written up. Part of the bet you are attempting to wager is that when they are written up by their newfound superiors, the company will never, ever, follow up and call them to the carpet for it. Either that or ALPA won't take up the defense.

It is a matter of time, and probably not that much time, before a pilot(s) is officially answering the charge of his FA/gate agent superiors for not doing a required PA when directed by said superiors to do so. What will the company do then? What will ALPA do then?

+1. /ignore purpledrank