|
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 968779)
BTW, how did you dirty dogs up there in MSP do your SLI's? Wasn't it a requirement 1 month on the line and 1 month in the sim? Not perpetual sim with say 3 months on the line as DAL does? Or obviously heavily DGS?
Makes sense to me.... |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 968830)
worth repeating. |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 968727)
Oh yeah, I read that! :D
Ya know what 1D is? Permitted Aircraft types of A and C operators. Nu |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 968828)
I also wonder this... DL used to routinely train 100 pilots a month.
Combined that should equal a capacity for 160 noobs a month on top of normal movements and recurrents. |
Originally Posted by NuGuy
(Post 968845)
Anyone have any additional info?
Nu |
|
Originally Posted by iaflyer
(Post 968719)
The DTW 20 Newsletter today said this, in the contract admin section:
Section 1: The administration has been made aware of a potential violation of Section D.1 of the PWA. The MEC will receive a briefing from the master chairman in closed session at the meeting.
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 968727)
Oh yeah, I read that! :D
Ya know what 1D is? Permitted Aircraft types of A and C operators. Its blatantly obvious that Republic has been thumbing their nose at our scope clause with their holding company / separate certificates charade. Now that even the NMB is set to declare RAH a "single carrier", maybe the administration has decided to enforce Section 1.D. That language in our contract is very important. The clear intent is to prevent any code-sharing which directly subsidizes competition on larger jets. RAH is a textbook case of this. They're using the guaranteed profits they make from the fee for departure arrangements with Delta to purchase and operate Airbus and Embraer 190 jets that directly compete with Delta jets of the same gauge. That is the exact conduct prohibited under Section 1.D.2.c . |
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 968877)
Seems maybe the rabble rousing here on "Latest and Greatest" has finally prompted the MEC into taking a look at whether RAH is an "air carrier".
Its blatantly obvious that Republic has been thumbing their nose at our scope clause with their holding company / separate certificates charade. Now that even the NMB is set to declare RAH a "single carrier", maybe the administration has decided to enforce Section 1.D. That language in our contract is very important. The clear intent is to prevent any code-sharing which directly subsidizes competition on larger jets. RAH is a textbook case of this. They're using the guaranteed profits they make from the fee for departure arrangements with Delta to purchase and operate Airbus and Embraer 190 jets that directly compete with Delta jets of the same gauge. That is the exact conduct prohibited under Section 1.D.2.c . |
Originally Posted by bluejuice71
(Post 968803)
How is it that we can only train 600 pilots a year? When I was hired in 2000 we were hiring 60 a month and now we've got NWA's training center also.
Top end limited. Retirements will come off the top, and that is where the training is the most limited. Also, the new training cycles eat up a ton of training time. Block hr limited. We can only deal with a certain percentage of pilots in training at a particular time for schedule integrity. Point, is we are a lot leaner than we once were. |
Originally Posted by NuGuy
(Post 968845)
Anyone have any additional info?
Nu Call your reps. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:48 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands