What category? Pretty much every briefing I've been in begins with planning out landings based on who needs them the most.

This is bad gouge. I see the most Sr. FO's bidding with LCA's or reserve, then not scheduling a sim. CPO backs me up.

No idea what your saying.

You're kidding right? Give me the approximate number of Captains called in in the last 35 years for a talking to about recency. I've never heard of it. What scout troop do you belong to?

Well, I can name one! That would be me! I had a FO show up 30 minutes late (don't mind guys who are late but most text or call) for brief and then say he needed a leg. He then bragged he never flew because he put a mil leave day in the middle of every reserve block. He still had a month to go but only two day reserve blocks left. He didn't get a leg. The other FO and I were also about 30 days out on going non current so we took the legs. CP mentioned I should help keep guys current. I said check his schedule! Never heard anything else.

Still don't get your LCA statement and not scheduling a sim. Do you mean the FO would avoid flying by bidding with LCA's? Why would a CP want to discuss that with you?

330, yes, there is usually a discussion, but on a 4 man crew, there are 2 landings and 4 guys, so by default 2 aren't going to get one. Then throw in the Captain you're paired with going on vacation "soon" and "maybe dropping a trip" and he takes the leg, irregardless of what's going to happen with you.

Then another problem with the 330 is when we go to AMS (which we do a lot) we often lose one FO and get different one, so the landings may of already been promised to the other FO if you join a CA/FO pairing that have been already flying together.

Anyway, I like flying and want to get landings, I say I need them and it's been pretty hard. Now with a reduced schedule for winter and a lot of people on reserve, I'm guessing it's unlikely I'll stay current in the airplane until the summer schedule kicks in.

I honestly think mil folks would feel more guilty about giving this "eff you" to the company if the company wasn't so frequently saying "eff you" to the mil folks.

I'm not saying it doesn't happen and that some cases aren't valid.
However, sometimes when you dig a little, you find that many of these "injustices" are a result of some pretty shady use of mloa. In a situation like this, you're not necessarily giving an "eff you" to the company, you're giving and eff you to the pilot that has to go fly your trips for you.

I hesitate to judge anyone's use of MLOA (or sick leave, or disability) without knowing important details beyond their schedule or PCS activity. Sure, there is probably some shady use of MLOA.

I'm confident there is shady use of parking-break release (basically stealing), last-leg push-it-ups (imagine the extra fuel used and expense for some commuters to increase their odds of getting home, or local pilots to kiss their kids goodnight) and other sundry "me first" behaviors too.

Human beings who feel that they have been harmed are more likely to find justification for bad behavior they might otherwise avoid. I'm not willing to single out military members as better or worse than anyone else on our list...I'm just saying that if you treat them better, they'll treat you better. Broad generalization.

BTW, plenty of mil members would take significantly LESS mil leave if the company dropped their illegal denial of concurrent duty. In that case, "the guy who has to go fly (my) trips for (me)" might actually get more days off.

This was ten years ago. They were not saying anything at the time. I suspect it was this type of behavior that led to the change in how the company handles mil leave.