You just have to wonder how much FPS2 has cost in fuel, inefficiency and lost revenue.

I was just laughing at the implication of enough QOL in our rsv system that would permit consistent 12 hour LC rsv from thousands of miles away. I suppose its possible under simultaneously occuring conditions:

*Living in a city with ultra high, never ending flight frequency, plus direct cargo options.

*senior on reserve

*in a large category with a lot of reserves

*willing to "roll the dice" regularly and/or willing to come up during certain times of the day while on LC, even with no actual assignment.


12 hours LC, no mercy, no waivers/no favors strict interpretation of a commuter clause that you will still get a "letter" for using even if you exceed its parameters generously...all equate to answering your question about sitting transcon LC on rsv as: "maybe, sometimes, but not consistently unless you are willing to play the game and do what it takes".

But regularly sitting LC on rsv while always having 2 flights on a rolling 24 hour basis, etc, especially in anything other than the largest categories with heap big relative seniority, just doesn't seem feasable to me, hence the LOLcano. YMMV of course, and good on you if it does.

It was a definite large "gain" in the aggregate for the pilot group. One that I worry will rapidly degenerate into asinine little seniority bubble "empires" where double/triple dipping lawyer-ball players will double or triple their pay as a reward for being martyrs by buddy bidding with LCA's to prime the pump. I do not support that, at all. The previous recovery obligations were excessive, but I'd swiftly trade back the "no recovery" for other gains for the entire pilot group while ensuring adequate protections for trips bid for and awarded.

Like same footprint, not one minute earlier on the front end and not one minute later on the back end, and all hotels in domiciles paid for between days if necessary. But I don't want to see a handful of guys scamming the system by buddy bidding with check airmen and basically getting their entire schedules dropped and then going back in and white slipping for double net pay or green slipping for triple net pay, all month, every month, as supposed reparations for being victimized for the very thing they guaranteed would happen. That is not a "good for you!" pro-pilot ataboy; that is a rediculous scam that a select few will be able to play and that all of us will have to fund, one way or the other.

While we're at it, let's bring back touch drop vacations and add back in the 6th week, that way a couple guys can bid two 12 day carry out trips and never work! Weeeeeeeeeee!

The new hire lock was fair, and the recovery parameters needed to be fixed. But it went way too far the other way and we are all paying for that. It may not be that big of a deal now, but like you said, when things really pick up, this could rapidly degenerate into an extremely expensive scam for a select few, and we need to be ready to trade that out for more reasonable remedies.

I agree with gloopy.
Sitting reserve from across the continent seems a bit excessive.
I don't think the stress would ever be worth it. That's just me though. I can't imagine commuting to reserve from any distance.
To each his own I suppose.

Not much stress, just always have to be ready to head to the airport. If I'm sitting around doing nothing for months on end I'd rather be happy where I'm living.

Yes indeed. When I quoted Richard and Ed's written statements to the financial media that the TA was cost neutral, all the usual DALPA suspects called me a liar and said I was mis-stating the intent of their statements. Then the DALPA officers vigorously defended the TA as not cost neutral at the road shows.

I only care that we learn from our mistakes. What was our biggest mistake? Substituting the "judgment" and "expertise" of the MEC administration for our own judgment and logic.

Carl

If you wind up on a SLOA, you do have travel benefits but they are below S-3. Bar is correct that while out on paid sick leave, you can't non-rev without special permission.

????

The pilot group finally gets a big win and you think that its unfair because all of the senior FO's will gravitate to bidding with LCA?

How would that be any different than them using their seniority to fly: only week days, all the Rome layovers, bid off on the holidays, etc...?

They aren't guaranteed to be off the trip just because they are flying with a LCA.

I can't think of anything negative about this for the pilot group. People are still limited to the max pick up.

I agree with you. I look forward to bidding with senior LCAs when the time is right. Additionally, trips touching vacation drops would be great, so would power moveups, and all of the other inefficiencies that we have given away over the years.

We should go back to bidding by telephone too. And make sure the FE does the time cards right.