Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > JetBlue
JetBlue Latest and Greatest >

JetBlue Latest and Greatest

Search

Notices

JetBlue Latest and Greatest

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-20-2016 | 09:02 AM
  #1061  
CaptCoolHand's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,150
Likes: 0
From: Left,Right, Left, Right,Right,Left, Right, Left
Default

I think the issue with displacement has less to do with the FSM and more to do with the PEA and how it's worded. There isn't any way to displace someone out of a base per the language or lack there of in the old PEAs.

They could probably get away with shrinking a base, but closing it all together is out until we have a CBA with actual displacement language. Nothing is stopping them from opening up a new base... but you'd still have to staff it. Then the problem lies in if say you shrink one by ~50 but only ~20 bid out. Now you're well overstaffed on one end and have to train for the other.

That's the way it was explained to me.
Reply
Old 09-20-2016 | 09:05 AM
  #1062  
CaptCoolHand's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,150
Likes: 0
From: Left,Right, Left, Right,Right,Left, Right, Left
Default

Originally Posted by Softpayman
JFK E190 isn't going anywhere. There's a lot of flying done there plus MX capability.
You can remove the plane from the base as far as staffing goes, but still have to plane transition through the base.

But I do agree with you, I doubt they remove it.
Reply
Old 09-20-2016 | 09:28 AM
  #1063  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,690
Likes: 29
Default

I don't think they would have any issues getting enough guys to willingly transfer from JFK to FLL. Especially if it's combined with the typical Airbus upgrades too.

Just look how many guys bid out of that category on the last bid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply
Old 09-20-2016 | 09:32 AM
  #1064  
Flyby1206's Avatar
SDQ Base Chief
20 Years
On Reserve
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,051
Likes: 33
From: 320 CA
Default

Originally Posted by RiddleEagle18
I don't think they would have any issues getting enough guys to willingly transfer from JFK to FLL. Especially if it's combined with the typical Airbus upgrades too.

Just look how many guys bid out of that category on the last bid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Exactly. BOS/JFK 190 have the most movement for CA and FO. There won't be any problems finding 30-50 crews to transfer out one way or another.
Reply
Old 09-20-2016 | 10:09 AM
  #1065  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,295
Likes: 4
From: CA
Default

What's with the string of 5 or so E190 JFK CA awarded (all roughly same seniority) who are all listed as Management?

Are they training center guys who just bid it so they can get the pay bump but don't really fly?
Reply
Old 09-20-2016 | 10:18 AM
  #1066  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Softpayman
What's with the string of 5 or so E190 JFK CA awarded (all roughly same seniority) who are all listed as Management?

Are they training center guys who just bid it so they can get the pay bump but don't really fly?
Basically. They're Captains "on paper". They'll still get paid their 90 hour guarantee at A320 FO rates. Only difference is they can sell their PTO back at CA premium pay and on their fly days (once they've gotten their UOE and fed ride completed) they can fly as CA. Also, on off days, they can RSA/VDA as a CA.
Reply
Old 09-20-2016 | 10:56 AM
  #1067  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Chrisx2
Basically. They're Captains "on paper". They'll still get paid their 90 hour guarantee at A320 FO rates. Only difference is they can sell their PTO back at CA premium pay and on their fly days (once they've gotten their UOE and fed ride completed) they can fly as CA. Also, on off days, they can RSA/VDA as a CA.
But doesn't this create a problem with staffing on the JFK 190 CA side??
Reply
Old 09-20-2016 | 11:07 AM
  #1068  
Flyby1206's Avatar
SDQ Base Chief
20 Years
On Reserve
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,051
Likes: 33
From: 320 CA
Default

Originally Posted by 2FAST4U
But doesn't this create a problem with staffing on the JFK 190 CA side??
They are considered inactive pilots, and don't affect the net number of active pilots.
Reply
Old 09-20-2016 | 11:19 AM
  #1069  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Flyby1206
They are considered inactive pilots, and don't affect the net number of active pilots.
Makes sense, thanks!!
Reply
Old 09-20-2016 | 12:14 PM
  #1070  
727_Driver's Avatar
facing forward
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
From: forward facing stick actuator
Default

Originally Posted by Chrisx2
Basically. They're Captains "on paper". They'll still get paid their 90 hour guarantee at A320 FO rates. Only difference is they can sell their PTO back at CA premium pay and on their fly days (once they've gotten their UOE and fed ride completed) they can fly as CA. Also, on off days, they can RSA/VDA as a CA.
The CBA better close those shenanigans.. That's BS, takes flying and $$$ away from line pilots. Not to mention is just a waste of potential profit sharing cash.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Zoomie
Major
36
01-28-2015 11:44 AM
iahflyr
Major
27
09-30-2014 09:04 AM
Mason32
Regional
277
07-27-2010 06:01 PM
Scott34567
Regional
41
05-29-2008 07:08 PM
Sir James
Major
0
07-29-2005 07:02 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices