![]() |
|
Originally Posted by Jack Bauer
(Post 1468952)
Based upon? It's pretty rare to see positive rumors or CP whispers turn out true these days. Unless they are funded by more productivity (ie horse trading for 717's).
I'm hearing the 300 is going to be more like 500. Given what I've heard from the big dogs concerning off the street hopefuls, the dots connect. |
Originally Posted by boog123
(Post 1468917)
You see what happens when you over due the Kool Aid, too much sugar isn't good for you! Let's be careful out there. #I'm a believer
|
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1468989)
What in the world are you talking about? Put the syrup down man. It's bad for your health. ;)
So say the furlough recalls get sent to the 717, 320 and 88. Are they locked into these seats after training? Or can they bid off in the next AE they're able to participate in? What Im ultimately asking is do we junior guys have to worry about more displacements if these guys bid off their assigned equipment? |
Originally Posted by cni187
(Post 1468995)
You know what happens when they get that syrup in them, they get all antsy in the pantsy.
So say the furlough recalls get sent to the 717, 320 and 88. Are they locked into these seats after training? Or can they bid off in the next AE they're able to participate in? What Im ultimately asking is do we junior guys have to worry about more displacements if these guys bid off their assigned equipment? |
Originally Posted by cni187
(Post 1468995)
You know what happens when they get that syrup in them, they get all antsy in the pantsy.
So say the furlough recalls get sent to the 717, 320 and 88. Are they locked into these seats after training? Or can they bid off in the next AE they're able to participate in? What Im ultimately asking is do we junior guys have to worry about more displacements if these guys bid off their assigned equipment? |
Originally Posted by Roadkill
(Post 1468756)
Johnso, you're wrong on the sick leave.
Deleted a long post... basically, company is calling to ask for nature of illness and supporting docs even when you send in a verification doctor's note, with no good faith basis (I asked). Had it happen to me, USAF docs note not good enough... verification denied.
Originally Posted by Denny Crane
(Post 1468784)
Then you should make sure you have all your supporting documentation and call Dalpa asap. That is not right and not what is in the contract.
Denny Wondering what I'm not getting here that everyone thinks it's way outside the lines for the CP to be calling. The way I read it they've got that right. Granted, calling left and right just because they can will at a point give DALPA enough evidence to make a case that it's apparently more harassment than good faith basis. But if the number of calls is 31 then they're probably safe. Edit--Reread Roadkill's post: If they said they were calling with no good faith basis then yes, I get that that is against the contract. If that was the case then I'd ask why they were calling then (if I wasn't over the hours/days limits). BTW, what are some examples of good faith basis? The PWA states good faith basis calls can't be made solely for the amount of sick leave used or the frequency of sick leave. |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1468963)
Well, hiring is happening... you said for sure that wasn't going to happen.
I'm hearing the 300 is going to be more like 500. Given what I've heard from the big dogs concerning off the street hopefuls, the dots connect. |
Originally Posted by GunshipGuy
(Post 1469009)
I don't see how it's not what's in the contract. You have the part about days and hours of unverified sick use, but the section right after that gives the CP the ability to call on a "good faith basis." They could call Roadkill using the justification of "good faith basis" couldn't they? As to not accepting USAF doc note, well, the PWA says they have the option of requiring a doctor's certificate, and it goes on to mention a company designated doctor.
Wondering what I'm not getting here that everyone thinks it's way outside the lines for the CP to be calling. The way I read it they've got that right. Granted, calling left and right just because they can will at a point give DALPA enough evidence to make a case that it's apparently more harassment than good faith basis. But if the number of calls is 31 then they're probably safe. Edit--Reread Roadkill's post: If they said they were calling with no good faith basis then yes, I get that that is against the contract. If that was the case then I'd ask why they were calling then (if I wasn't over the hours/days limits). BTW, what are some examples of good faith basis? The PWA states good faith basis calls can't be made solely for the amount of sick leave used or the frequency of sick leave. The majority of the issues have been when guys want to voluntarily verify prior to 100 hours. It usually becomes a question when the pilot sends in a generic note, not necessarily from a Doc, saying "John Doe was out from work" and not much more. The CPOs then check a little further. They need to honor the contract and for the most part they are. Anything that even remotely smells like what you call "harassment" is being dealt with. The thing to keep in mind is if you are behaving ethically wrt sick and only using it for its intended purpose, you will never have anything to worry about. |
Originally Posted by Dehav
(Post 1468949)
"24OCT13".......above date....not yet happened.
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1468951)
Wasn't that from 2012? You jacked up the date, brah.
Ain't no good way to explain that. 24OCT12 Operator We’ll take our next question from Mary Jane Credeur with Bloomberg News. Mary Jane Credeur - Bloomberg News Hi, folks. Can you talk a little bit about how you’re going to afford that new pilot contract? Richard Anderson Hi, Mary Jane, this is Richard. Sorry for not saying hello. When you look at the overall value that we’re going to create as a result of unlocking the ability to refleet plus the productivity that has been built into that agreement, we’re confident that it will be an important part of our ability to get to unit cost over the next couple of years to improve our margins and our return on invested capital. Glen Hauenstein And, Mary Jane, this is Ed. One additional thing, we also reduced the profit sharing going forward and that’s an important part of helping to fund that cost growth. Mary Jane Credeur - Bloomberg News Sure. Okay. Thank you. Operator We’ll take our next question from... |
Originally Posted by Roadkill
(Post 1468765)
Good letter from Steve Dickson out today on hiring info.
He gave some good info and details on the numbers of folks and where they'd come from for training. Said 168 recall guys had to answer, of which 142 said they'll return and 8 have declined. At that rate, extrapolated to the full 168, there will be 159 folks return. http://i.imgur.com/ObhrQQU.png |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:54 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands