Originally Posted by Timbo (Post 1374167)

You'll know it's happened when you see a little 25yr. old Asian girl with a SN of about 15,000+ flying your next Joburg trip, with all the 68yr. old 'area code' (3 digit SN) gals.

One of the senior momma's was telling me about that Asian Moffia program, they call it...

"Snatch" :D

She said they have gone to the company to try to put a stop to it, but the company won't do anything about it.

Originally Posted by johnso29 (Post 1374001)

Nice to see you twisting my words to your advantage. It's obvious I'm hoping the company's shameless attempt to get people to AE/VD to the 717 backfires in their faces. Your avatar/username is appropriate. :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by cni187 (Post 1374185)

Geez you guys are so triggered to anger!! I just meant that as friendly little banter by saying let's test your theory.

Originally Posted by XtremeF150 (Post 1373976)

I think I might go 22 @1659. There are A LOT of displacements on this one.

The 717 is the most loved a/c in the fleet apparently. 216 senior to 116## want B and 987 want A with 360 as a #1 choice for that 4th stripe.

In fact there are over 300 more pilots with a 717A in than there are 777A. Realist I guess :D

Originally Posted by Scoop (Post 1374208)

How many of those 717A have a 1% restriction? A lot of guys probably figure, "Yeah, I'll do it if I can be number one." For the most part the AE % numbers are worthless and are especially worthless in any Bid with a large number of AEs.

Scoop

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 1374067)

Talk to some of the scheduling people about the effect that change would have on jobs. It would be huge. The company would certainly love it.
I have commuted almost my entire career. Plenty of GS's go out to commuters. I watch the trip assignments in my category and when the are short lots are covered the day prior. The driver of overtime is how a category is manned. At least with the GS process the company has to increase manning as a result of using that option. Considering the angst on here about job loss I am surprised anyone would advocate reducing overtime pay by 50 percent and losing the manning increases from GS's. the company could really run things skinny with everyone crawling all over each other to break 80.

Originally Posted by porpilot (Post 1374219)

Are we still pay protected if we get MD to smaller paying equipment?

Originally Posted by Timbo (Post 1374124)

Here's the simple math:

Flying 5 more hours, on average, ie. 80 instead of 75, adds 6.66% productivity, which is how the company wants it. To US, that means 5hrs. mo'money, but it also means they need 6.66% less pilots to accomplish the same amount of flying. On a 10,000 pilot list, that equates to 666.66 fewer pilots needed to do the same amount of flying.

Now, ramp that up to 85, from our old baseline of 75, that's 13.33% or 1,333 less pilots needed. Want to fly 90 a month? If everone does, that means 2,000 less pilots required, vs. a 75 hr. cap. The company will love you! DALPA will love you (the guys who's pay is based on the average pilot's hours), but the bottom 2,000 may not think it's so wonderful.

Now you see why we've had stagnation and a shrinking seniority list, vs. hiring.

Here's a little something else that's hurting our needed numbers. Why do you think the company wanted to combine the 767Er and 767 Domestic? Because now they won't need as many reserves to cover both categories, they can use all 767 Reserves for both Domestic and Int. flying, which requires less reserves overall.

The only bright spot for us is, Richard seems content to keep bringing in new fleet types, which requires more guys off the line, going to training, and will require more reserves spread into yet another aircraft category. It may replace the overages caused by combining the 767ER+Dom, but at a much reduced pay rate (717 pay vs. 767 pay) and after all the DC9's are parked, it will wash out to less pilots needed overall.