|
Originally Posted by Herkflyr
(Post 1965059)
So in your universe having the A350 at 777 rates was a "fail?" At least your screen name is accurate.
|
Originally Posted by qball
(Post 1965146)
The fail was DALPA constantly trotting out and touting rates that only a very small percentage of the pilot group will ever see, while at the same time trying to justsify the LCA trip drops as it would only affect a small percentage of F/Os.
|
Originally Posted by Scoop
(Post 1965000)
OK, I will try this again. The past impact was negligible. The current impact is small but increasing. The important thing to consider is the future.
Many FO's will benefit from this in the very near future. So if this is really a "must have" for the company lets not just give it away! Finally a question - If the IOE trip drops are negligible and don't have a significant impact on productivity then why was/is it a "must have" for the company? Answer - Because the company has the foresight to look forward and plan ahead when the impact will be huge. Scoop |
Originally Posted by Purple Drank
(Post 1964950)
Dalpa must have authorized the rocky mad dog persona to start posting again. They kept it on ice leading up to the recall vote. Smart move. Not really a consensus builder. More of a "what's wrong with Dalpa" in every paragraph he types.
|
Originally Posted by RockyMtMadDog
(Post 1965161)
In the "old days," if your trip was dropped for an OE, you were subject to recovery flying. That was wrong. The fix, however, results in some FOs who make a mini-career out of getting paid to rarely fly or who make well north of what their counterparts in the left seat make. Either way, it's featherbedding, and provides a disproportionate contractual benefit to a small population.
|
Originally Posted by RockyMtMadDog
(Post 1965161)
In the "old days," if your trip was dropped for an OE, you were subject to recovery flying. That was wrong. The fix, however, results in some FOs who make a mini-career out of getting paid to rarely fly or who make well north of what their counterparts in the left seat make. Either way, it's featherbedding, and provides a disproportionate contractual benefit to a small population.
I see it as way to make up all the lost income due to furlough, merger, PBS, PRP's ETC................ Your priorities are way off.................... |
Originally Posted by thinkstraight
(Post 1965174)
Why is this a problem? Most of the F.O.'s have seen nothing but stagnation and backwards movement for the majority of their career.
I see it as way to make up all the lost income due to furlough, merger, PBS, PRP's ETC................ Your priorities are way off.................... |
It is a disproportionate benefit to a small group. [/QUOTE]
Please show us the numbers!! How many pilots actually disproportionately benefited from this policy??????? And define disproportionately. |
Originally Posted by RockyMtMadDog
(Post 1965176)
My priorities are just fine. It's a problem because it provides a dispoportionate benefit to a small population. Lose the "woe is me" attitude and realize that none of us have had the career we expected, and you'll see that.
Good one dude. Obviously the only person that matters is you. My bad....... |
Originally Posted by RockyMtMadDog
(Post 1965161)
In the "old days," if your trip was dropped for an OE, you were subject to recovery flying. That was wrong. The fix, however, results in some FOs who make a mini-career out of getting paid to rarely fly or who make well north of what their counterparts in the left seat make. Either way, it's featherbedding, and provides a disproportionate contractual benefit to a small population.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:39 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands