Airline Pilot Central Forums - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)

- - Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/36912-any-latest-greatest-about-delta.html)

So from what I gather its okay to fly fatigued as long as it pays well. :confused:

Quote:

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 1645777)

Rumor only however it looks like the CDO's were not pushed hard by the company. They were desired and requested by pilots who were flying them and wanted them back….

Who requested them and when did they make the requests? Was there an ALPA survey that went out that I missed, or ignored? It's possible that I don't remember it, so I'm really just asking.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Check Essential (Post 1645887)

The kicker on these CDOs is going to be the pay.
That has not been discussed on this forum yet.

The 7+30 is not a straight pay number.
Some of that is going to be pay/no credit for a lineholder and on top of guarantee for a reserve.

Rumor is that any amount over trip rig or block is going to be premium.

ie = if the CDO is 3 hours of block you will get the remaining 4+30 as pay/no credit.

There could be some guys working 10 days and getting paid 100 hours.
(again, state college math. buyer beware :eek:)

We need to see the TA.

If that were the case some guys would still try to fly to 100 hours hard block and get to 125 pay hours. To each his own, but the "Man Wh0res" amongst us will be digging that.

Of course we all know what 15% of the Pilots flying close to 1000 hard block hours a year does for a upward movement. :eek:

Scoop

Quote:

Originally Posted by newKnow (Post 1645912)

Absolutely. But, even if they did, I think my question remains. Does it make sense to you?

NewK- I think the piece you are missing is that the current contract requires us to acknowledge- this was probably initially in the contract by the company for their own benefit. However, with the changes in 117, it became an item that benefits us. Unless The company could come up with something to make DALPA willing to give up this benefit, they wouldn't give it up. Probably if they had asked us to get rid of acknowledging trips 2-3 years ago the union would've given it much more cheaply. (Paid the $7000 from your example). But since it now has increased value, the company had to give more.

I'm not saying I'm in favor of the agreement, just that that may be what you are missing vs the company just unilaterally declaring "no acknowledgement required" back in January. It would still be a dicksonian change by decree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sink r8 (Post 1645906)

He seems to be far better informed, and informative than you ever are, as well as more balanced. I don't see him making personal attacks, which leaves the field wide-open for you to debate him on facts and issues.

Can you do that?

Spare me your fake outrage. I didn't attack Alan, I asked a question. And I did it in a similar sarcastic way as he responded to 88Driver above. Here's what he said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan Shore (Post 1645872)

In essence, the FAR specifically limits what the Company can do and simply admonishes the pilot to "do the right thing." It sounds to me as though you do not trust your fellow Delta pilot to do that right thing.

Should we perhaps petition the FAA to put into place a requirement that each pilot spend the ten hours before each duty period in a monitored, isolated facility to prevent him from acting irresponsibly prior to report? maybe we should ask the Company to save us from ourselves by having the station manager measure our fatigue and/or alertness level prior to each report. :eek:

Now, keep in mind that 88Driver had a very good point about pilots feeling pressured to fly CDOs if assigned to them. He's spot on. The same applies to pilots flying sick because they don't want to deal with the hassle. To think this pressure is not there is naive. It may not be so for you, me, or Alan but it does affect some. We've all flown with pilots who should've called in sick. The same will happen with CDOs.

Further, Alan has been posting non-stop regarding the recently inked TA. I will reserve my judgment until I read the full language.

Although he acknowledges some shortcomings in the TA, the overwhelming majority of his posts cast the TA bullet points (I remind you that we haven't even seen the final language) in an overly positive light. As for the concessions (ex: CDOs) he dismisses them by saying that some pilots actually want them or that he is senior enough to bid around them.

Call it what you want. Is he just being optimistic? Hopeful? Does he have an agenda? It sure feels like spin to me. I'm curious to know if he's on FPL. And now I'm curious if you are too? :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 1645716)

As much as I hate to admit it, it's really the only way out of all these ridiculous 30 hour layovers and killing ourselves on the day after the 30 hour layover.

Killing yourself the day after a 30 hour layover??

How can you not be rested after a 30 hour layover?

Quote:

Originally Posted by newKnow (Post 1645737)

Ok. I just read the Chairmans letter. What's funny to me is that, unless I missed it in all the acronyms, it doesn't mention what the agreed upon solution is to what started this whole mess to begin with. Ie. When does a long call pilot have to acknowledge a trip. :confused:

If it's as everyone suggest's, and reserve pilots don't have to acknowledge trips, then why did we get all these "improvements?"

Ok, it's true. I'm being HIGHLY skeptical, but follow me.

On January 1st, the company and ALPA were at odds. Back then, the worst the company could do is allow pilots to acknowledge trips prior to 3 hours before report time, as opposed to what they wanted (10 hours).

Why is the company now allowing us to not to report at all and still giving us all this "stuff?" Am I to believe that we are going to get better than our original position without unnecessary givebacks?

From the company's standpoint, wouldn't they have done better if on January 1st, they had just said "Ok. You win. Acknowledgment 3 hours prior to report is just fine." and not given us these "improvements?"

To me it seems like I go into a car dealership and offer to pay $7,000 for a car that has a $10,000 price tag on it. Then the salesman counter-offers to sell it to me for $5,000 and a list of other things that have nothing to do with the car. I'd be skeptical that he didn't just take my $7,000. Wouldn't you?

Am I missing something?

We go to a assumed acknowledged system. Scheduling changes lineholder/reserve schedules all the time before/during/after trips. They have also been known to alter block times and change schedules without letting you know. CNO is a complete disaster. In all/any of these cases, who is going to get blamed when you are unaware of a change/addition? You think we have seen an increase of PDs so far?

Getting acknowledgement is the only thing that keeps scheduling remotely honest now. And, forget the spin. It is really a 3 hour leash for LC now to meet the real intent of the FARs.

If we go to this, all pilots will be checking their scheds a lot more than they are now. That is not cool.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Masters (Post 1645919)

So from what I gather its okay to fly fatigued as long as it pays well. :confused:

That is definitely the impression I am getting as well......:eek:

"Schedule with safety" ehh? 'Meh. As long as we make coin who cares, right?

CDO's suck. Period. They are fatiguing all the way around. I found them to be more fatiguing than redeyes. I would bet that any of the so-called "experts" that did the "scientific" gobbly-gook studies have never done any themselves. Make them do a months worth and see what they say then. In addition, some people seem to be in la-la land as to what the people who do CDO'S are doing during the day, prior to showing up for work three or four days in a row.

Not to mention it is a ridiculous step backwards towards the work rules of any two-bit regional contract. Especially when you take the other tidbit in this loa regarding the move to far 117 limits vs our current contractual limits. Far limits with CDO's.

Up next: airport ready-reserve.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Masters (Post 1645919)

So from what I gather its okay to fly fatigued as long as it pays well. :confused:

Now you're getting it.:(

(Personally, the 30-hr layovers in SFO, PDX ... we're just fine.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 1645777)

Rumor only however it looks like the CDO's were not pushed hard by the company. They were desired and requested by pilots who were flying them and wanted them back.

What survey/poll did I miss asking about/regarding CDO's?

How many pilots petitioned or contacted their reps to bring back CDO's to warrant them being included in this LOA? Specifics please.