That's great...until we get another Moak for MEC Chairman.

 

Absolutely.

"We don't think they'll do that" is code for "bend over, we're getting schooled again."

 

Well then ................ that will obviously never happen.

Scoop

 

Thanks for the update.

Regarding the >14 for a leg though, are we 100% sure this applies to all legs? What if a leg departs ATL 11:00 from now, but the return leg departs STL 14:01 from now. How do we cover that return leg when there isn't a pilot there to originate? If a DH is built, suddenly that's less than 14 hours as well. Hmmm.

What about any return flight from an out station? Are we sure the outblund flight that's part of a reroute will become a WS/GS coverage trip on the way back? If so, how does the rerouted pilot get back? I have a hard time believing the company will DH a crew to get them while they DH back especially after what would have been legal rest. What about hub-to-non-hub-to-other-non-hub legs? It really seems like there will be legs that are known outside of 14 hours that never go through the coverage process.

If they are talking about originators from a hub, I wouldn't expect much attempt for pushing the limits and perhaps good software could monitor things. But I don't see strict adherence for non hub return flights. My guess is the company won't ever put that up for WS/GS and will always use the originally rerouted pilots and if we grieve it they will claim that was the intent all along and it would be unreasonable to expect every single >14 leg to go out to the slip system especially when that would generate additional double crew DH credits.

 

Bringing Regional flying (work rules, but not airplanes) to Delta airlines one TA at a time. Great legacy our union is leaving for all future Delta pilots. "Schedule with Safety!"

 

I don't think that's a fair comment. We made great strides under Moak regardless of what you believe in your own little world. That being said, the problem with this MEC scheduling chairman having to buy into the company's wanting to go to 2+15 is that it will happen for the following month's bid period, and we line dogs will have no input to that process. The same MEC guys, whose work I am greatly appreciative of, will have little to no exposure to those rotations on a continuing basis, therefore they do not KNOW how they affect those doing them. Am I pessimistic about these things, You bet your A$$ I am. From a personal perspective, I will not be able to safely operate an airplane on 3 hours "sleep". Like Dirty Harry said, "A man's got to know his limitations" I know mine. This exceeds them by a long distance. So what I want to know is how am I going to be protected from repercussions of calling in fatigued? Why is this provision in there? Will the company want 3+00 in section 6? Why wouldn't they? IOW, we are handing them negotiations fodder to have to defend in the upcoming contract.

 

In all fairness, a LOT of the pilots I speak with ask for more productive trips. You have to consider what that might mean. The company probably said "OK, but NFW are we paying you 5:15 to sit around on those 30-hour layovers". Which probably led to the solution of breaking some of the trips out of rotations as SDP's.

I'm guessing that the genesis.

One important question about how ADG's might affect non SDP trips is whether it will be applied to each day, or the entire rotation. If it's day by day, the company could not afford to have us fly < 5:15 on the first and last days. Adios commutable trips.

So, since I have no language on the ADG's... Imagine a 3 day trip blocked at 4:15/6:15/4:15. Does it pay:

1) 5:15/6:15/5:15, i.e. 16:45
or
2) the greater of block or 5:15 * 3, i.e. 15:45 > 14:45, i.e. 15:45?

 

Time to trade in "gut feelings" and "probably", "maybe", etc with something more solid to protect those who cannot safely do CDO's and should not be penalized financially or have to do carpet dances in front of the chief pilot for turning them down when they are being forced on the schedule.

 

The real difficulty here will be the standard problem of politics. "Scrappy" and his team are strongly behind this TA as is Donatelli as stated in his letter. Our reps aren't just faced with the decision of voting their conscience based on our known desires. They're faced with "Scrappy", Donatelli and the rest of the MEC administrators viewing a NO vote by reps as a vote of no confidence against them. Will reps want to deliver that indirect message to the team that are set to take us into Section 6?

I've done CDO's back at NWA. I bid them because they looked so good on paper. With my first two, I got plenty of rest during the day and was unable to sleep during my six hour hotel stay. Last leg home was extremely fatiguing because of no sleep. Next I tried staying active all day so I could sleep during six hour layover. Actual sleep was only about 4 hours and I flew last leg home extremely fatigued due to fighting sleep inertia. Never bid them again.

I'm curious as to how a wrongful death attorney would pursue Delta and the pilot's estate if a CDO pilot caused a fatal car crash on the drive home. Actually, I know exactly what the wrongful death attorneys will do.

Carl

 

CDO's are a no. Automatic no! But only if we get a vote!