Originally Posted by index (Post 1626209)

But the issue remains for the single x-day. The fact that they could (if indeed they can) just tack on 6 hours of "rest" (on your first on-call day) towards your 30/7 just doesn't seem right.

Originally Posted by index (Post 1626209)

If scheduling did assign (prospectively for this example) the first 6 hours of your first on-call day as counting towards your 30, how does this change a pilot's obligation to check his schedule on the x-day prior? My gut tells me that, by this change, the x-day is no longer the last "non-fly" day. Therefore, the first on-call day becomes the last (albeit partial) non-fly day and would therefore fall under 23 S 1. d. 2, thus requiring a pilot to check his schedule within 2 hours after the end of such non-fly day, i.e. check schedule by 0800. What say you?

Originally Posted by Roadkill (Post 1626204)

Short answer-- DON'T USE THEM! They are NOT REFUNDABLE. One of the two of them implies it MAY be refundable depending on the fare rules.

Originally Posted by Alan Shore (Post 1626263)

As the Company has always used even a single X-day to count as a pilot's 24 in 7 rest requirement, I'm not sure I see the issue in giving him notice ahead of time that his time off will now end at 0600 rather than midnight the night before to give him 30 hours. He gets extra time off, and it counts as his rest.

What am I missing?

Originally Posted by groundstop (Post 1626202)

With regard to the FAR part 117, it seems to be an easy fix. Move long call to 16 hours, and we agree to acknowledge by 10 hours, giving us at least a 6 hour window to acknowledge a trip as opposed to the current 2 hour window (worst case scenario).

16 hour long call would really benefit guys that are stuck commuting to reserve.

Originally Posted by Roadkill (Post 1626204)

Short answer-- DON'T USE THEM! They are NOT REFUNDABLE. One of the two of them implies it MAY be refundable depending on the fare rules. I spent 20 min buying some, going over fare rules to ensure I was getting refundable ones.
Two months later, they wouldn't refund them, every person I talked to told me flat out NEITHER was refundable, and I had my non-rev privileges threatened when I asked agent to actually LOOK at the ticket fare rules I had printed out with the tickets showing it WAS refundable.

I've never been as mad at the company as I was then... don't try to save that bogus 10%, it's a scam and you can't trust them-- you don't even get to go through a normal agent, they are all "special reservations" agents for travelnet who basically are in place to stiff arm and threaten you.

Sounds harsh I know, but after going to soooo much effort to ensure I bought refundable tickets, getting $4000 stolen from me administratively by the company taught me my lesson. Now I no longer try to purchase tickets on Delta to help the cause.

Originally Posted by index (Post 1626159)

Exactly. You haven't heard a word about it from your union. The word on the street is that dalpa and the company have agreed that no grievance will be filed as long as they are still talking. Can anyone confirm that?

Sailing is hedging his position. Notice that he said "around May 1st."

I've asked sailing before about his source regarding his assertion that dalpa will file an MEC group grievance at the expiration of 120 days. So far, he's refused to answer the question. So how about it sailing, what's your source?

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 1626270)

Your fix would work fine and be legal. Some here on the forum would call it a huge sellout. We are seeking a bit more then what you mention.

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1626237)

http://www.mattderody.com/wp-content.../ladiesman.jpg

dude time flies. i used to stay up for the clamp show, sometimes I can still do it but i have been house broken.

Originally Posted by index (Post 1626269)

The fact that I'd rather have the entire 30-hour break on my on-call days. And not on a layover either. :)

Originally Posted by newKnow (Post 1626279)

Wouldn't it be an improvement over what we have now though?