I don't remember them being built into other trips, but then I was only at NWA from 99-03. Was that after bankruptcy?

That was back in 07-10 time frame. When I came back from furlough. It was in the middle of a 5 day. mSP- FSD They did them at least on the dc-9. I know because I was awarded them during the bid. I did not bid CDO's. However; I was awarded them.

I don't recall that either...maybe I just got lucky. I did have one month (on the Airbus) where I really hosed up my bid and it gave me 12 for the month...all stand alone. They were all long legs...MSP - BZN was the bulk of them. Damn near killed me and I didn't finish the month before getting sick. Other end of the spectrum was MSP-FAR...couldn't touch those they were so senior. Never recall them in the middle of a longer trip.

and:

nwaf16dude is only wrong on one point, when he suggests that anything concern about CDO's on the grounds of safety is "silly". I rank the DPA right up there with kidney stones, except for the fact kidney stones eventually pass. So it's not gratuitous dislike of CDO's on my part. And it's not a monetary argument I'm making.

I also think it's fair to say that just because something goes senior, it is not necessarily safe. There is little correlation there. The stronger correlation is between senior and money. So the CDO's are being sweetened quite a bit, maybe even to the point where some guys are attracted. Doesn't prove they're safe. The fact guys used to do them before doesn't make them safe.

It's also quite safe to say that just because some trips appear on a line, doesn't mean they will be flown by that pilot. Reserves are going to fly these, and probably not by choice.

How could prospective be prospective if you don't know about it?

A lot of these "interpretations" from various people and organizations are going to water down the intentions of the regulation.

We should get something in the contract now, with the intention of getting a new "interpretation" later that changes it for our benefit. We call that deceit, the ATA and company calls that chess. Let's start playing chess.

We have a number of those on the NYC 7ER. I did a few JFK-PDX 3-days. I liked them a lot.

I believe this TA can't replace those sort of trips, as the two legs must be < 2hours each.

It would appear that we have been wasting a lot of bandwidth here on this forum worrying about domestic augmented Transcons.
The MEC blew right through that issue in about 10 seconds. Nobody expects the company to do that in a domestic market. And if they ever did it would be so rare as to be insignificant.
The company wants that language about augmented non-Ocean Crossing flights so they can do augmented trips out of Narita and Haneda to SIN and a few other destinations. The pilots want that language as well.
That whole section seemed pretty non-controversial.

Yeah, there are a lot of DPA pimping and a ton of "the sky is falling" drama, but... sometimes you get a "condescending asshat" comment that just makes you smile. It reminds me of the magic of spoken word poetry. I used "condescending ashat" all last night. You can imagine my wife's delight. And today's turn saw it used just a couple of times. Unfortunately, my 15 year old has greeted this new term as an old friend. Please imagine my wife's delight. (I told her that I heard it from a FA so I could still come to APC.)

A rest period must be prospective in nature, which means that a flightcrew member must be told in advance that he or she will be on a rest period for a specified duration. This is so that a flightcrew member has an opportunity to plan out his or her rest period in order to maximize the sleep opportunities available during that rest period.

That is from the FAA. If they were able to get around that, they certainly deviated from the intent of the rule. Must have cost a lot of under the table cash.

Because it's your job to know about it on Reserve?

I think the FAA is probably allowing the company to work this the same way they're getting to set the clock by first attempted contact on trip assignments. I was on LC, and there was a trip in open time 12:07 minutes away. I drove my kid to school, and came back to a couple of message timed at 12:03 before report, and the scheduler made certain to mention the time in both messages.

This way, you're not being rewarded for hiding. Not to mention the fact that the contract stipulates that being contactable is your responsibility.

As far as lineholders go, if they try to change your rest, since you have no responsibility to be contactable, I think rest can't be prospective until you acknowledge.

The TA is addressing rest for LC Reserves. Seems pretty kosher, actually.