Originally Posted by tsquare (Post 1721341)

Not sure I follow you. My solution makes it possible for a guy in NY to have the ATL guys count towards his reserve required number. Nothing more. The company is gonna do what they are gonna do in order to fly the schedule. If that entails DHing a pilot from another base to cover (which it often does) then all I am saying is that that ability should extend to us for accounting purposes. Now if you are suggesting that we can stop them from DHing that ATL pilot to NY to cover, I am all ears, but I would think that would result in broken rotations and reroutes out the wazoo.

Oh, and How bout them Vols? I watched it in a bar in Manhattan this afternoon. lots of rednecks in NYC. :D:cool:

Originally Posted by Pineapple Guy (Post 1721361)

Carl, I think everything above 80 hours should pay 2X, not 1.5. I think 2X is a general disincentive to Delta, and they'll increase manning to prevent doing it on a regular basis. But 1.5X is just enough that Delta will just let us all fly til we die, rather than increase staffing. That's why I'm opposed to it. It's not enough penalty to Delta.

Originally Posted by Pineapple Guy (Post 1721370)

I'm not looking to be punitive. I'm trying to find a way to protect us from ourselves. You and I have been around long enough to remember when this was a good job --- 75 hour hard cap, zero medical premiums, DB plan. Now, guys are flying 90+ hours at straight pay on a regular basis. Guys fly 100+ hours credit in vacation months, effectively flying a full month and getting their vacation pay on top of that. As a result, seat progression has been non-existent for many of us for many, many years.

I'm simply asking us to consider rolling back the limits on straight pay flying. Is that so bad?

Originally Posted by scambo1 (Post 1721385)

While it is not enough penalty to delta, it is a great incentive for the Ho's to become uber Ho's. 2x over 80. Sign me up. This is my street corner.

Originally Posted by Pineapple Guy (Post 1721370)

I'm not looking to be punitive. I'm trying to find a way to protect us from ourselves. You and I have been around long enough to remember when this was a good job --- 75 hour hard cap, zero medical premiums, DB plan. Now, guys are flying 90+ hours at straight pay on a regular basis. Guys fly 100+ hours credit in vacation months, effectively flying a full month and getting their vacation pay on top of that. As a result, seat progression has been non-existent for many of us for many, many years.

I'm simply asking us to consider rolling back the limits on straight pay flying. Is that so bad?

Originally Posted by Pineapple Guy (Post 1721411)

Agreed - but the penalty comes in because our PWA has provisions in which GSs trigger an increase in the required staffing formula. There are no such provisions when guys white slip to 99, or swap to 100+. There should be.

Originally Posted by Purple Drank (Post 1721420)

But guys, sailingfun said the contract is better now than it was before BK!

I guess he didn't like the 75 cap.

I'm on board with anything to disincentivize the rampant wh0ring.

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1721371)

Understood and agree 2X over 80. That would effectively get rid of green slips which are all but like Sasquatch as far as I've seen. Only the top 5 or 10 guys in my category ever see them and I'd like to see the wealth spread out more evenly.

Carl