![]() |
|
I don't see any reason why certain language needs to be implemented right away; the company posted a $440 million Q1 profit while weathering several major IROPS AND while the pilot group benefited from FAR 117 driven greenslips. I would say we are both doing quite well right now.
Also, the way to fix an inefficient 30 hr layover is with a DAILY GUARANTEE. CDO is a concession. I'm over concessions. Lastly, if rumors are true then I'm for MEMRAT. |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1644946)
The increase in 30 hour layovers caused a increase in system wide credit. I don't know but suspect CDO's might reduce that credit. CDO's themselves also have a lot of credit so not sure what offsets what.
|
Originally Posted by Delta 320Driver
(Post 1644990)
It is a win-win.
|
Why can't we see the agreement? Are we incapable of comprehending it without Dalpa's spin?
|
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 1644986)
It sounds like we got the 5:15 per day.
Purely hypothetical on my part, although I understand that we tried for that in C2012. |
Originally Posted by index
(Post 1644998)
Inevitably the final result is they win we lose.
|
Originally Posted by Michael Jackson
(Post 1644996)
I don't see any reason why certain language needs to be implemented right away; the company posted a $440 million Q1 profit while weathering several major IROPS AND while the pilot group benefited from FAR 117 driven greenslips. I would say we are both doing quite well right now.
Also, the way to fix an inefficient 30 hr layover is with a DAILY GUARANTEE. CDO is a concession. I'm over concessions. Lastly, if rumors are true then I'm for MEMRAT. |
What is the 117 fix? Requirement to acknowledge assignments in a certain amount of time on long call?
|
Originally Posted by Alan Shore
(Post 1645004)
Or the other way around.
And we no longer have a DB pension. DAL and the execs are making butt loads of $. Us, not so much. Meanwhile our healthcare costs are going through the roof, our pay is substandard, and inflation continues to eat away at our declining purchasing power. If you think "we're winning" I respectfully disagree. |
Originally Posted by Delta 320Driver
(Post 1644990)
I don't agree.
I spoke with 2 of my reps and got some of the alleged details of the CDO language. 1) The legs to be flown cannot be more than 2 hours in length 2) The CDO layover has to be SCHEDULED for > 6 hours. I am with you that a pilot isn't going to get the kind of sleep they would prefer but it is a pretty good amount considering the old CDO's had us sleeping on the airplane at times! (XJ Days) The CDOs are going to go fairly senior due to the trip rig and I also think that solving the 30 hours layover issue is in everybody's interest. If I can get home 12 hours earlier and make the same amount of money, I'm all in. I don't see aiding the company from an efficiency standpoint as a "give" on the negotiating front. It is a quality of life issue for pilots. We can fit more flying into our schedules (if you choose to do so) and you spend more time at home. It is a win-win. So say you have a CDO that reports at 2100 so a 2200 take off and it's a 1.5 flight, so you land at 2330 and you say we have to have greater than 6 hours off so lets use 6.5 hours. next flight report is 0600 with a 0700 takeoff and an 0830 block in. Total duty day appears to be 11.5 hours. Just under the FAR 117 max and a heck of a lot longer than the current allowed for a coast to coast all nighter. Welcome to the world of night freight. fly a leg, go to the hub and try and get some rest then fly absolutely bleary eyed to the outstation. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:38 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands