I think it is more the idea that we went slightly backwards on this. But what a lot of the upset guys are not mentioning is still how much better reserve is compared to years past. When I got hired 17 years ago, for your first day on call, it was automatic short call at 0300--every time, system-wide--and the "just say no" crowd never said a peep. Now guys are complaining that they could possibly report as early as 1000.

Also, neither the contract, any MOU (that I'm aware of) nor the FARs ever restricted first day reports to 1200 or later. It was simply an internal company policy since January while they tried to sort through all the new issues that 117 brought up.

A potential 1000 report--at the earliest--for your first on-call day is not a deal-breaker in my opinion.

 

DAL88, the Delta MEC Policy Manual was changed after the merger. Now it simply says,

"Collective bargaining agreements that have been approved by the MEC and result from negotiations undertaken pursuant to both Section 28 of the PWA and Section 6 of the Railway Labor Act that both resolve all Section 6 issues and conclude Section 6 negotiations shall be subject to membership ratification. All other agreements shall be subject only to MEC ratification unless the MEC determines that an agreement should be subject to membership ratification."

 

Because, we lost ground in that area. It's a worse position than what we were getting from the company before.

If the company needed us to help them out with the restrictions imposed in our contract, why are we doing 2 hours worse in that area now?

 

What I find fascinating is how you see a lost set of usual suspects while I see a group of Delta pilots debating an issue near and dear to their hearts, about which no one has much definitive information.

Seeing those political boogymen again in every post?

 

Maybe we're getting something better in return? I don't know.

 

If by "political boogyman" you mean "MEC bending over to help the company at the expense of the line pilot," then yes, I'm seeing quite a bit of that.

 

Here's my thing and this is where I know I am on the outside. I'd rather take off at 2300, land at 0100 takeoff at 0137 (717 turn time) and land at 0337 and go home. It's kind of like a 5 leg day with a 2:30 hour sit, that is a killer. Let me just keep going.

But I am a night owl and seriously work off 6 hours of sleep per night. Eventually that will change but with two little kids if I can get 6 hours of uninterrupted sleep it's like 10 hours of sleep was when I was in college.

The worst part of an IROPS night in my experience is trying to leave the airport. I did a MDT once and we landed at 3am. The hotel said sorry we sent our van driver home at midnight so you need to get a cab. Well yeah us and 149 other people were waiting for a cab. So we got the hotel to get us one... whole ball of wax there... got to the hotel at 5am and then went into a now 20 something hour layover.

Just to me leaving the airport to take a nap followed by returning and going through TSA and doing that whole thing would be a pain. I'd rather sleep in the airplane and get a solid 6 hours of sleep.

Now I can feel the tomatoes being thrown in my direction more so then when I poke my head into an Alaska thread about Juno. But i'm just saying what I see as less fatiguing, now what is good policy. I'm just thinking that leaving the airport and returning on a CDO is going to be a PITA on the backside of the clock.

Thus, I don't think that 6 hours is a good idea and therefore will say CDOs are not a good idea.

It's just me and I don't speak for.... my guess is hardly anyone.

 

[QUOTE=sailingfun;1646309]Funny, I have received several calls from my pilot friends who can not believe there are concessions in the TA. Interesting the difference of opinion.

 

Herk, I think part of the heartburn is coming because our MEC has said when we have leverage we will use it to IMPROVE things. It seems, as a whole, this agreement is another checkmate for management. Btw, every single small item that "doesnt seem to have any good use" or things management will "probably" and "likely" not be using, WILL be used. Let's not be naive or foolish thinking it's just words and not in there for a reason.

Anything that has negative safety repercussions should be a no go. Anything that reduces staffing should be a no go. We've stagnated from the fallout of 911, SARS, sunken economy, "synergy" and parked planes from a merger", age 65, to C2012's increased productivity. Please stop! The company can afford to throw some more bones in work rules and compensation now. Let's work toward that end. In the mean time status quo helps us more than hurts us (especially given the FAA's 4 recent clarifications which were published yesterday, weighing in our favor). Siphon off the last remaining leverage we may have and watch management ignore us when C2015 rolls around.

On a side note, I think one has to really consider where the company is going regarding notification. Don't be surprised if in C2015 they have it all tied into the tablets that are coming. I believe their ultimate goal will be for us to tote that tablet around and shorten the leash even further. Let's keep a sharp eye out when the language is produced on this TA to see if there is more small print aimed in taking us that direction.

 

That's exactly how I felt when NWA did them. We might want to keep that quiet though. It might wind up in our next agreement.