JV settlement email
08-03-2015 | 03:40 PM
#41
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,869
Likes: 187
Though if the E190 order was indeed cancelled because there is no pay scale for them, are we also canceling the A350 order?[/QUOTE]
The 2012 contract includes a pay rate for the E190. If we don't get a contract prior to delivery the 350 rate will be set in arbitration.
The 2012 contract includes a pay rate for the E190. If we don't get a contract prior to delivery the 350 rate will be set in arbitration.
08-03-2015 | 04:22 PM
#42
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Do you think the company will want a 350 rate before they begin 744 displacements?
I tend to believe that they would really like to see the 744 drivers not move over to the 777 and cause a cascading training mess. Having a 350 rate equal to the 777 would be a big help to the guys that run the training ouji (sp?) board.
It's their mess; it could give us some more leverage for TA-2.
08-03-2015 | 05:11 PM
#43
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
Nobody fought harder to bring that flying to Delta than I. Here on APC & on Chit Chat it was called a "B Scale" even though it paid $15 an hour more than the highest 747 rate pre-merger and more than the 7ER left seat prior to C2012.
Overall, it did not seem pilots had much enthusiasm for the type. Even among guys I worked with on the Compass resolutions.
... and I will continue to work for improved scope & more flying for Delta pilots until "purged" as you say.
Overall, it did not seem pilots had much enthusiasm for the type. Even among guys I worked with on the Compass resolutions.
... and I will continue to work for improved scope & more flying for Delta pilots until "purged" as you say.
I'm all for the E jets to be flown by us. Unfortunately, they were part of this TA...a carrot. I'm all for the carrot. But, the carrot was coupled with a stick. To eat the carrot, you got whacked by the stick.
This stick was partially a loss on the top end of scope. It doesn't take a ton of imagination to see that when you delete the growth opportunity on the big high paying stuff and replace it with lower paying smaller gauge jets (which pay significantly less than similar gauge we already fly) where the trajectory is.
I'm not certain you understand this completely because you are in the seniority band where you would fly left seat on the e jet...great! For me and many others, we want the jets at mainline but, they are behind us seniority-wise. It's a carrot I want, but not to get hit by the stick of big jet opportunity loss.
08-03-2015 | 05:16 PM
#44
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,869
Likes: 187
Do you think the company will want a 350 rate before they begin 744 displacements?
I tend to believe that they would really like to see the 744 drivers not move over to the 777 and cause a cascading training mess. Having a 350 rate equal to the 777 would be a big help to the guys that run the training ouji (sp?) board.
It's their mess; it could give us some more leverage for TA-2.[/QUOTE]
I dont think it gives us any leverage. The displacement this fall will not be impacted at all by the A350. A year from now with the last 747 displacement guys will be in the window to displace to the 350. We will long before that have a payrate. The company need only serve notice they want to enter talks on the rate. We have to enter talks within 15 days. If no agreement in 90 days it goes to binding arbitration.
08-03-2015 | 05:21 PM
#45
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,869
Likes: 187
Bar,
I'm all for the E jets to be flown by us. Unfortunately, they were part of this TA...a carrot. I'm all for the carrot. But, the carrot was coupled with a stick. To eat the carrot, you got whacked by the stick.
This stick was partially a loss on the top end of scope. It doesn't take a ton of imagination to see that when you delete the growth opportunity on the big high paying stuff and replace it with lower paying smaller gauge jets (which pay significantly less than similar gauge we already fly) where the trajectory is.
I'm not certain you understand this completely because you are in the seniority band where you would fly left seat on the e jet...great! For me and many others, we want the jets at mainline but, they are behind us seniority-wise. It's a carrot I want, but not to get hit by the stick of big jet opportunity loss.
I'm all for the E jets to be flown by us. Unfortunately, they were part of this TA...a carrot. I'm all for the carrot. But, the carrot was coupled with a stick. To eat the carrot, you got whacked by the stick.
This stick was partially a loss on the top end of scope. It doesn't take a ton of imagination to see that when you delete the growth opportunity on the big high paying stuff and replace it with lower paying smaller gauge jets (which pay significantly less than similar gauge we already fly) where the trajectory is.
I'm not certain you understand this completely because you are in the seniority band where you would fly left seat on the e jet...great! For me and many others, we want the jets at mainline but, they are behind us seniority-wise. It's a carrot I want, but not to get hit by the stick of big jet opportunity loss.
08-03-2015 | 08:34 PM
#46
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Bar,
I'm all for the E jets to be flown by us. Unfortunately, they were part of this TA...a carrot. I'm all for the carrot. But, the carrot was coupled with a stick. To eat the carrot, you got whacked by the stick.
This stick was partially a loss on the top end of scope. It doesn't take a ton of imagination to see that when you delete the growth opportunity on the big high paying stuff and replace it with lower paying smaller gauge jets (which pay significantly less than similar gauge we already fly) where the trajectory is.
I'm not certain you understand this completely because you are in the seniority band where you would fly left seat on the e jet...great!
I'm all for the E jets to be flown by us. Unfortunately, they were part of this TA...a carrot. I'm all for the carrot. But, the carrot was coupled with a stick. To eat the carrot, you got whacked by the stick.
This stick was partially a loss on the top end of scope. It doesn't take a ton of imagination to see that when you delete the growth opportunity on the big high paying stuff and replace it with lower paying smaller gauge jets (which pay significantly less than similar gauge we already fly) where the trajectory is.
I'm not certain you understand this completely because you are in the seniority band where you would fly left seat on the e jet...great!
The not-so-glamorous domestic work is ~ 78% of our flying. If that were increased by 16%, then it would drive more hiring.
08-04-2015 | 03:20 AM
#47
The Brown Dot +1
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
The company is in compliance on an EASK basis with the AF/KLM/AZ JV for now. Going to a BH balance meant little (statistically nothing for the time being) and had the potential to benefit wide-body jobs going forward. I would not support a plan that cost a single job. (period, full stop)
The not-so-glamorous domestic work is ~ 78% of our flying. If that were increased by 16%, then it would drive more hiring.
The not-so-glamorous domestic work is ~ 78% of our flying. If that were increased by 16%, then it would drive more hiring.
Also, "statistically nothing for the time being." There's that rearward looking data supporting the future "we didn't think they'd do that."
Hub to hub longer distance rj flying is a leverage killer too. SEA still not a hub. Bar, wake up, drink coffee, whatever it takes. Your idealism is grossly outgunned.
08-04-2015 | 04:49 AM
#49
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
From: Right Seat 744
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
