Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1644192)

so I did a 16.14 cr 3-day last week. when it was all said and done it paid 22.07 but not sure why.

Day 2 was to be 9.11 duty and 5.08 block. Ended at 14.36 and 6.40 block.

The overnight went down to 10 hours.

Next day instead of flying 5.42 i flew 1.42 with 2.0 deadhead getting done 1:30 earlier.

Some how 6 hours more was paid and the trip shows closed.

Ill take it and run but curious.

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1644192)

s
o I did a 16.14 cr 3-day last week. when it was all said and done it paid 22.07 but not sure why.

Day 2 was to be 9.11 duty and 5.08 block. Ended at 14.36 and 6.40 block.

The overnight went down to 10 hours.

Next day instead of flying 5.42 i flew 1.42 with 2.0 deadhead getting done 1:30 earlier.

Some how 6 hours more was paid and the trip shows closed.

Ill take it and run but curious.

Originally Posted by TenYearsGone (Post 1644179)

On the other hand, I wish there were a way to ban these over 8 hour domestic days. I am beat. The efficiency might be good, but it makes for a real tiring day especially following a short layover, no crew meals and quick turn.

Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 1644220)

Disregard, I don't think you can go on 1 for 2 duty with FAR 117.........or can you because that sounds a lot like you did?

Denny

Originally Posted by Denny Crane (Post 1644220)

I don't think you can go on 1 for 2 duty with FAR 117

Originally Posted by newKnow (Post 1644146)

Hummm. Why does Delta have to file in the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of Georgia? What if the majority of their cancelled flights are in NYC? Also, are you saying that THAT federal court would handle the contract dispute and SD's memo?

Originally Posted by newKnow (Post 1644146)

Even if they do, what difference does it make? Are you saying the Court would immediately rule on the issue of interpreting what Delta did and not have to issue an injunction in the face of Delta canceling flights?

Originally Posted by newKnow (Post 1644146)

So, my opinion isn't based in law? Ok. If you say so, but I'm pretty sure this is the opinion the company would use as the framework for it's case against us. The good stuff begins on page 63. I think it's more pertinent than the case law you posted.

https://crewroom.alpa.org/ual/Deskto...cumentID=44168

Originally Posted by newKnow (Post 1644146)

I also guess we are going to have to agree to disagree on whether or not Delta would be able to fly their schedule with an increase of long call pilots getting PD's for assigned trips. From what I see, Delta is going to have trouble finding pilots for some flights already - especially for the summer. This is without any more of an increase of reserve pilots getting PD'ed from trips.

Originally Posted by newKnow (Post 1644146)

Finally, your fall back provision of not caring if Delta is successful in getting an injunction against us is problematic. What do you, mean "…so what?"

Originally Posted by GunshipGuy (Post 1644095)

From ALPA:

Part 117 & Scheduling: FAA Releases More Interpretations

The FAA has issued four new legal interpretations in response to independent requests to clarify the application of Part 117 to specific situations. These new interpretations address, among other things: checking of schedules during rest, fitness for duty certification, short-call reserve duty limits, flight-duty period (FDP) extensions, and split-duty assignments.

The McFadden interpretation clarifies that a contractual requirement to check a schedule terminates Part 117 rest at the time the contractual obligation begins, even if the schedule is not actually checked until later. That interpretation also clarifies that a “fitness for duty certification” made prior to learning of the need for an FDP extension is not “sufficient as a concurrence” in an extension because “a person cannot concur with something that he or she does not know about.” The FAA concluded the same rationale applied whether the extension needed was 30 minutes or less, or more than 30 minutes.

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 1644108)

Kind of hard to file a grievance on 1 May when the company has all ready agreed to pay the pilots effected and you have a agreement in principle and are working on final language.

Originally Posted by Alan Shore (Post 1644263)

True, unless you're going into a deadhead-only duty period. Otherwise, you need at least ten hours of rest under the FARs. Even with a 30-minute report you would have more than the 8:15 or 9:00 required by the PWA.