Envoy
09-21-2017 | 02:50 PM
#4431
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 3,578
Likes: 48
From: Semi-Retired...
Other than "that's how it used to be", what reasoning would lead to the conclusion that you are entitled to a higher seniority based not on merit or experience, but on being born on an earlier date?
Just about any potential factor I can think of (time spent committed to the company, part 121 experience, general flight experience, crew or military experience, additional ratings, past positions held, etc) would, to me, seem like more justifiable factors to sort seniority by. Years until mandatory retirement (the inverse of age) does seem pertinent, but I would think the airlines have a vested interested in keeping younger people happy, as they have more longevity--at least as far as regulations go.
This isn't a personal attack on your stance, I'm genuinely curious.
Just about any potential factor I can think of (time spent committed to the company, part 121 experience, general flight experience, crew or military experience, additional ratings, past positions held, etc) would, to me, seem like more justifiable factors to sort seniority by. Years until mandatory retirement (the inverse of age) does seem pertinent, but I would think the airlines have a vested interested in keeping younger people happy, as they have more longevity--at least as far as regulations go.
This isn't a personal attack on your stance, I'm genuinely curious.
If you want to discuss longevity, the airline is actually better off only hiring age 50+ pilots. If flow ever stops, nobody will ever be at top pay steps for long, upgrades continue. Same applies for flow. Having older guys come through keeps the average longevity lower.
There are pros and cons to any seniority system.
Nothing's perfect, but this was still a good idea I think.
Last edited by Cujo665; 09-21-2017 at 03:19 PM.
09-21-2017 | 02:50 PM
#4432
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,729
Likes: 0
There's always going to be some overlap with someone who interviewed when they change their method, just unlucky. This industry is all about timing.
09-21-2017 | 03:15 PM
#4433
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
From: EMB-145
Welcome to flying for any regional you choose. There will always be a LOA put in place that ****es somebody off somewhere.
09-21-2017 | 05:10 PM
#4434
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
This is a great idea. Something our union should of negotiated for us while doing this LOA......oh yea we don't have a union that cares about their own pilots.
09-21-2017 | 05:42 PM
#4435
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 2,510
Likes: 0
Flow with delivery of 40th 175
So what is the deal with the flow now that Envoy has taken delivery of the 40th 175? Does this mean more will flow now or less as it looks like every subsequent group seems to be? When does it actually take affect? Does it change anyone already selected?
09-21-2017 | 05:48 PM
#4436
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,523
Likes: 0
All it means is that Envoy can send more guys, but they don't have to. It increases the cap from 35% of monthly AA classes being made up of Envoy pilots to 50% of monthly classes. HOWEVER...Envoy can still restrict it to only 25 pilots per month going if there are staffing constraints. Basically, nothing changes.
09-21-2017 | 06:23 PM
#4437
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2017
Posts: 991
Likes: 9
Other than "that's how it used to be", what reasoning would lead to the conclusion that you are entitled to a higher seniority based not on merit or experience, but on being born on an earlier date?
Just about any potential factor I can think of (time spent committed to the company, part 121 experience, general flight experience, crew or military experience, additional ratings, past positions held, etc) would, to me, seem like more justifiable factors to sort seniority by. Years until mandatory retirement (the inverse of age) does seem pertinent, but I would think the airlines have a vested interested in keeping younger people happy, as they have more longevity--at least as far as regulations go.
This isn't a personal attack on your stance, I'm genuinely curious.
Just about any potential factor I can think of (time spent committed to the company, part 121 experience, general flight experience, crew or military experience, additional ratings, past positions held, etc) would, to me, seem like more justifiable factors to sort seniority by. Years until mandatory retirement (the inverse of age) does seem pertinent, but I would think the airlines have a vested interested in keeping younger people happy, as they have more longevity--at least as far as regulations go.
This isn't a personal attack on your stance, I'm genuinely curious.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
