Envoy 2019
#151
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 3,649
I mean they could say that every single year. But what they actually get, we shall see. I personally truly hope they do. But I'm getting worried as we start falling behind in pay. As of the last NewsBlast on 12/7, we had a net gain for the year of 126 pilots, which is great. It means of the 638 hired in that list we had a lot of movement. I just hope we can stay on course and the well of RTP/Cadet guys isn't drying up while everyone else who hasn't signed a contract goes to other carriers with higher pay. At some point I feel like that well is going to dry, and I'm hoping it's not 2019.
#152
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2016
Posts: 2,465
Oh, do tell. I’m not saying you’re wrong but, if true, this would be the first bid in over a year where there were eligible FOs that were not forced to upgrade.
IF that did happen, that implies there were some that had an empty 3P (at least as regards to captain) that didn’t proffer to displace, and were fairly senior since they weren’t displaced and there were MANY that were.
This is important info really. If there were FOs that were forcefully upgraded that were senior to those NOT upgraded, the union needs to know.
IF that did happen, that implies there were some that had an empty 3P (at least as regards to captain) that didn’t proffer to displace, and were fairly senior since they weren’t displaced and there were MANY that were.
This is important info really. If there were FOs that were forcefully upgraded that were senior to those NOT upgraded, the union needs to know.
#153
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 262
Oh, do tell. I’m not saying you’re wrong but, if true, this would be the first bid in over a year where there were eligible FOs that were not forced to upgrade.
IF that did happen, that implies there were some that had an empty 3P (at least as regards to captain) that didn’t proffer to displace, and were fairly senior since they weren’t displaced and there were MANY that were.
This is important info really. If there were FOs that were forcefully upgraded that were senior to those NOT upgraded, the union needs to know.
IF that did happen, that implies there were some that had an empty 3P (at least as regards to captain) that didn’t proffer to displace, and were fairly senior since they weren’t displaced and there were MANY that were.
This is important info really. If there were FOs that were forcefully upgraded that were senior to those NOT upgraded, the union needs to know.
#154
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 3,649
Don’t want to throw out any names, but we can all do the math. Anyone with a seniority list, the upgrade list, and FOS access can find FOs with more than 1000 hours company time that did not upgrade. And, yes, they are all senior to the highest seniority DISP/NEB. I’m guessing that means empty 3P and empty 3D.
#155
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2016
Posts: 2,465
Don’t want to throw out any names, but we can all do the math. Anyone with a seniority list, the upgrade list, and FOS access can find FOs with more than 1000 hours company time that did not upgrade. And, yes, they are all senior to the highest seniority DISP/NEB. I’m guessing that means empty 3P and empty 3D.
#156
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Posts: 294
I'm not 100% sure on this, but I do know that displacements go from bottom up. So if the company ran all of the preference bids, and had vacancies left over to fill; they would start displacing eligible FO's from the bottom of the seniority list up. Those eligible FO's that didn't get displaced to CA likely didn't have anything in thier 3P & 3D, and were senior enough to dodge the displacement.
#159
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 490
I'm not 100% sure on this, but I do know that displacements go from bottom up. So if the company ran all of the preference bids, and had vacancies left over to fill; they would start displacing eligible FO's from the bottom of the seniority list up. Those eligible FO's that didn't get displaced to CA likely didn't have anything in thier 3P & 3D, and were senior enough to dodge the displacement.
#160
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2015
Posts: 92
7V only shows flight time for the last year. Many of the first officers who weren't displaced have very low annual flight time. A pilot hired in 2014 that only flies a few hundred hours a year due to union work, mil leave, medical ect. could still be below the 950 hour mark.
Also, there are a number of first officers senior to the most senior FO displaced to CA on this bid that were previously awarded/displaced into CA slots but have not gone to training yet.
Finally, with the standing vacancy there's a chance that the company is intentionally leaving CA slots unfilled. As an example let's say 100 CA slots for a position are posted in a bid. The company wants at least 80. Only 50 people bid for it so the company displaces another 30 to get their 80 and leaves 20 for the standing vacancy. I have no idea if this is contractually legal or not but if the company is doing this it would at least be nice of them to let us know what the minimum number they're looking for is.
Also, there are a number of first officers senior to the most senior FO displaced to CA on this bid that were previously awarded/displaced into CA slots but have not gone to training yet.
Finally, with the standing vacancy there's a chance that the company is intentionally leaving CA slots unfilled. As an example let's say 100 CA slots for a position are posted in a bid. The company wants at least 80. Only 50 people bid for it so the company displaces another 30 to get their 80 and leaves 20 for the standing vacancy. I have no idea if this is contractually legal or not but if the company is doing this it would at least be nice of them to let us know what the minimum number they're looking for is.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post