![]() |
Originally Posted by hilltopflyer
(Post 2833724)
I’m completely ok with having a subset group just for the fact that they will have to hire and upgrade more because of it. It’s almost a new type of plane in a way.
I could maybe see a single combined INTL bid category for the LR flying that covered the flying of both bases (obviously the group would either be based in Boston or JFK). Two small sub-groups would be even more inefficient. Having to train a subset of pilots and staff a foolproof (Jb-proof) group of reserves for only 6 aircraft (per base) would be ridiculous! |
Originally Posted by Bluedriver
(Post 2833730)
True. It's not entirely great for existing BOS/JFK A320 pilots because they will have to decide between flying ONLY London (no thanks) or NEVER London. But yes, that will create significant staffing inefficiency resulting in the need to over-hire.
I could maybe see a single combined INTL bid category for the LR flying that covered the flying of both bases (obviously the group would either be based in Boston or JFK). Two small sub-groups would be even more inefficient. Having to train a subset of pilots and staff a foolproof (Jb-proof) group of reserves for only 6 aircraft (per base) would be ridiculous! |
Originally Posted by nuball5
(Post 2833728)
Plus I’m assuming this subset group will mostly be senior folk who want to tell their friends and family that they fly over the pond. So it should help the seniority of people who are junior in the other normal domiciles.
|
Originally Posted by Softpayman
(Post 2833737)
Yeah because that’s why people bid, not for the money, the timing of the trips, enjoying layovers... it’s to tell their friends they fly over the pond.
|
Originally Posted by Softpayman
(Post 2833737)
Yeah because that’s why people bid, not for the money, the timing of the trips, enjoying layovers... it’s to tell their friends they fly over the pond.
|
Originally Posted by capt707
(Post 2833708)
The Europe flying will be a separate group (JFK/BOS), the FAA won’t sign off on anything else. That’s what the big wigs were saying last month in recurrent. They also mentioned about *possibly expanding the “below red line” flying into MCO.
|
It’s more of the management thinks it will be a desirable bid so once people go they won’t have to retrain someone instead of every time someone bids into jfk training them. They don’t like the idea of making recurrent an extra couple days just to get a whole base trained instead of a small subset. It’s not the FAA it’s $$$$$!
|
Originally Posted by hilltopflyer
(Post 2833782)
It’s more of the management thinks it will be a desirable bid so once people go they won’t have to retrain someone instead of every time someone bids into jfk training them. They don’t like the idea of making recurrent an extra couple days just to get a whole base trained instead of a small subset. *****************It’s not the FAA it’s $$$$$!***********
|
I’m all for a longer seniority list, But I don’t see how with only 13 airplanes it would even be possible to have a subgroup in 2 bases. There wouldn’t be enough pairings to complete a month with ALV’s in the 80’s with ONLY Euro flying... especially if it’s going to be mostly 15-16hr 3 day trips. Unless they plan on building a mix of 4/5 day trips that touch both Europe and US/Caribbean. Then maybe... thoughts?
|
15 hour 3 days!! Woo! I hope we have a separate category so the huge egos will bid over because they won’t be able to stand some other dude flying to London.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:31 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands