An interesting position - do you think we should apply those same rules when both pilots are bumped from training?

….or when a change of gauge occurs?

…or when a trip is revised to return to a pilots home domicile early?

I’m confident you know pilots are paid 100% for “not working” in all those instances.

When any pilot bids any line they are responsible for flying that line - if the company chooses to remove them for any reason, that’s a choice the company makes willingly. The pilot has zero control and zero choice.

The “this is only a bit of a concession” mentality is a very slippery slope — and exactly how you boil the whole frog slowly.

Additionally, you are ignoring the second and third order effects of those FOs not being awarded any line at all, and being forced to rebuild their whole month in the View/Add Window.

The effects will be far greater. Please understand the whole process and ripple affect upon all FOs below.

Surveys have been taken. Focus Groups have been held. Student Lines made the list of major concessions this pilot group doesn’t want to see.

Will our NC & Union Leadership stand fast?

It’s a fair question we need to ask prior to TA1.1/2.0….not afterwards.

In Transparency, Integrity and Unity (for Everyone),

DLax

We should definitely strive for a regional contract is what you are saying. Got to get the mission done, right?

MediocrePilot said he doesn't have to fly and still makes 100%. Just seems a little greedy and unrealistic to me. That's not the work ethic my parents taught me.

well we’re not working at mom and pop’s shoe repair store. Raj isnt a small business owner. This is one of those “industry standard” things that would be extremely dangerous to vote in. It would open the door for more student lines down the road.

Hasn't the system we have now of buying FOs off LCA lines been in place for decades?
Why now has a segment of the pilot group decided buying FOs off LCA lines is greedy and unrealistic. Have you been lobbying your whole career to
eliminate these pilot friendly sections of the contract, or just this contract cycle?

It would be just as greedy to enjoy the perks of our contract your entire career and then try to sell them away to get a windfall on your way out the door. No idea your specific situation, but the people with decades left in their careers are going to view your motives suspiciously.

Why don't we just put all the F.O.'s who get bought off their lines due to training into the reserve lot for the footprint of all their trips for the whole month. We don't want to be paid for doing nothing after all. Just go back to the squadron chief.

When the manning level thins, those on reserve are going to feel a new kind of pain!

Since it's not right for FOs to be paid for not working, I think it's only fair we terminate the pension plan in its entirety. Paying retirees for not working is even more appalling.

Gentleman -

The solution has always been, and will always be - sustained, steadfast unity.

Their approach will always be to divide, and market their desires as micro-changes .

Let's refocus our collective efforts on management.

The NC has always told us they look past the NC....at the pilots. That hasn't changed!

VR,
DLax

I hope you are able to keep your current language. Here at Brown, the company can elect to withhold the lines awarded to IOE iinstructors. Not optimum, but the idea of building a line from nothing (even at 125%) seems like a horrible plan.

Language:
Each bid period the Company shall have the right to designate a specified number of lines which have been bid and awarded to IOE instructor crewmembers for the purpose of IOE training. These lines may be bid by First Officers for pay purposes only but will be available for bid by Second Officers. The Company will assign the First Officers needing IOE training to these lines.

If they do not pre-designate, and then award the line to FOs and the company wants the seat for IOE, the FO gets displaced with pay.