![]() |
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1537520)
Irrelevant. Guys DO answer their phone, or their kids do... get grabbed in the jetway.... or whatever. Not all, but some. I see no difference in asking to fly a GS or accepting an IA when you KNOW it is skeds on the phone. It doesn't matter. You are pressuring one pilot to forego his contractual right while rewarding another for doing the same thing.
Not disagreeing with you at all. I can only tell you from a furloughed pilots perspective there is a difference. Thats why I proposed the 75 hour hard cap if I were king for a day. THoughts on that? |
Originally Posted by cni187
(Post 1537484)
I'm also curious: If 2.6billion pre tax
is it (10% of 2.5 Billion) + (20% of .1Billion)? Or 20% of 2.6 Billion? 250 mil + 20 mil = 270 mil or 520 million???? That's a big difference. |
edit….due to Herkflyr post edit
|
Originally Posted by fisherpilot
(Post 1537524)
So how would that look for a new hire? Not premerger DAL or NWA
|
Originally Posted by Dorfman
(Post 1537509)
The problem is GS is an option to fly, a right by the contract but optional none the less. IAs are not, if they get a hold of you, i.e. don't answer your phone.
|
Originally Posted by Dorfman
(Post 1537530)
You missed my point. I think the contract should change, via memrat, to a hard cap with guys on furlough. Yes I said if I was king for a day but since that is as likely as Carl and Tsquare agreeing on union representation I think your safe.
|
Originally Posted by Dorfman
(Post 1537526)
T
Not disagreeing with you at all. I can only tell you from a furloughed pilots perspective there is a difference. Thats why I proposed the 75 hour hard cap if I were king for a day. THoughts on that? |
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 1537531)
It would look like 15%.
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1537547)
There shouldn't be any difference in how you view it. I gu-ar-an-tee that guys will anxiously answer the phone when they see that skeds is calling with an IA. I'll give you another perspective to think about too. When the company furloughs, they know pretty well how long they will need to have guys out. Flying overtime, not flying overtime, doesn't appreciably affect it one way or the other. I would be willing to bet that they look at it from a worst case scenario, that being nobody flies overtime but that is just a guess on my part. As far as a hard cap... sure why not? I think it's mostly a feel good thing, but it wouldn't bother me...
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1537515)
Not your problem then. And they know that. However... if you flew .75M all the way, and THEN get holding they KNOW that too.... can you justify it? I'm not saying that they will go that route, and I believe it foolish for them to block trips so close to the limit, but they have reams of data on how long it should take to go from point A to point B. Don't you find it amazing that we can fly for 5,6, 12 hours and be within 10 or 15 minutes of the prediction on the flight plan? I certainly do. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:28 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands