Originally Posted by Timbo (Post 1152344)

In fact, it is usually OUR (DALPA) PBS guys who make suggestions to the company, about changing the stack heights, thresholds, etc. and doing mulitple runs, so not as many pilots get shuffled, unstacked, etc. I don't think the LEC guy was lying, and they do have a "mutual agreement" clause, that's why they have to do multiple runs.

If the DALPA QC guys don't like what they see, after the first run, they tell the company to "...change this and that, and run it again..." until they get numbers they can both agree on re. stack heights, reserves available, etc. That is the mutual agreement part.

If it were up to the company, they would do one run, award all the open time, (unstack every trip) and eliminate all the open time, have minimum reserves, or at least as few as they could get away with. And it would be ugly for us!

To be clear, I like our PBS system, now that I know how to bid! I got my first choice of days off, and trips, and I'm only at 50% of line holders in my category. BUT... if as the MEC claims, the AVERAGE pilot is flying 87 (not me, only 73 the last two months and next month!) then PBS has cost us Thousands of jobs.

87-75=12 extra hours, per pilot, on average. Let's leave out 33% for reserves and stuck in training, that leaves about 8,000pilots flying 12 extra hours. That equates to 96,000 extra hours being flown, per month. Divide that by 75 hours and you see we have eliminated the need for about 1,280 pilots, to do the same flying.

Want to know why you ain't movin' up? That's why.

Keep parking trips and you'll see more backwards movement.

Originally Posted by Sink r8 (Post 1152345)

Thanks Timbo. I might have misunderstood your original post.

Agree on PBS costing jobs.

I am absolutely, 100% against trip parking. In fact, I would advocate a cap, and closing some loopholes in Swap Board / SWF. Still, I was told parking only represents 1% of swap transactions, according to that same PBS guy. Hard to believe.

Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 1151779)

Our section 1 opener was so weak that it was weak even as a "conceptional" opener. Heck it could even be "interpreted" to mean a massive scope sale of ultra large RJ's. How about for every 10 fifty seaters parked, DL management can add 9 "hundred seaters" and we get to claim we are "improving the production balance"? That's worst case if we go by block hours, but even if we go by ASM's, try on: for every 10 fifty seaters parked, management can outsource 4.9 "hundred" seaters. See, that still complies with our weaksauce conceptual opener.

Even a conceptual opener should be better than this in the most important section in the opener (section 1).

Originally Posted by Timbo (Post 1152346)

Well...if that 1% number is true, HOW is the "Average" line guy flying 87 hours, EVERY MONTH??

Did anyone ask him that? :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Timbo (Post 1152346)

HOW is the "Average" line guy flying 87 hours, EVERY MONTH?? :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by capncrunch (Post 1152350)

They're not. That number is pure bologna.

Originally Posted by 1234 (Post 1152079)

That is funny and for some reason reminded me of this:

Cool pilot story.

Once upon a time, a pilot asked a beautiful princess, "Will you marry me?"


The princess said, "No!" And the pilot lived happily ever after and flew jets all over the world and drove hot cars and banged skinny long-legged big-titted flight attendants and hunted and fished and went to topless bars and dated women half his age and drank whiskey and Captain Morgan and never heard *****ing and never paid child support or alimony and kept his house and guns and ate cold spam, potato chips and beans and blew enormous farts and never got cheated on while he was at work and all his friends and family thought he was frickin' cool as hell and he had tons of money in the bank and left the toilet seat up........ The end.

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 1152138)

Gloopy our scope does not limit geared turbofans it is a seat count jet weight combination limit. If there was a 50/70/76 seat gtf out there, they could replace all of the current fleet of DCI jets with me tomorrow. DCI would by default get a 20 year repreive. Going for this limit is in effect a sunset clause on current generation jets.

Like I said, wait for a TA to make a determination. Unity is leverage and like it or hate it we as a group have to get behind the opener. It is that simple.

Originally Posted by Sink r8 (Post 1152353)

While the PBS guy didn't talk about this, the Treasurer did. It was said at the last meeting, in the context of a FPL discussion, that 87 hours was the average pay hours per lineholder. This includes vacation, sick, etc.

Why not inlcude Reserves? I think they should.

At any rate... you got better numbers?