CAL pilots lose
07-03-2009, 05:10 AM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: Left, left, left right left....
Posts: 911
Originally Posted by Superpilot92
why did they sue?
The dismissal of this suit is a very good thing.
07-03-2009, 05:19 AM
#5
Underboob King
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Guppy Commander
Posts: 4,412
Originally Posted by Fly4hire
This was the group that was past 60 at the time the new rule was passed and wanted to be grandfathered back in. Would have open the door for every pilot who retired at 60 but under 65 to come back to work at previous seniority.
The dismissal of this suit is a very good thing.
The dismissal of this suit is a very good thing.
)
07-03-2009, 06:51 AM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: Capt. B737
Posts: 329
If they stay as instructors.....will they now be paid as the most senior position they would hold if they were now back on the line? We'll see if the "Bubba" deals are still prevalent. This should be titled, "CAL Pilots Win".
07-03-2009, 09:43 AM
#8
Need More Callouts
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: Unbridled Enthusiasm
Posts: 2,143
This judgment has nothing to do with them returning to the line as required crew members. This lawsuit is directed at the Union from these guys for misrepresentation.
The FAA still has not ruled on the Unions inquiry that they were not required crew members at the time of the rule change.
Status quo until that ruling is revealed.
The FAA still has not ruled on the Unions inquiry that they were not required crew members at the time of the rule change.
Status quo until that ruling is revealed.
07-03-2009, 10:23 AM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: Left, left, left right left....
Posts: 911
Originally Posted by 757Driver
This judgment has nothing to do with them returning to the line as required crew members. This lawsuit is directed at the Union from these guys for misrepresentation.
The FAA still has not ruled on the Unions inquiry that they were not required crew members at the time of the rule change.
Status quo until that ruling is revealed.
The FAA still has not ruled on the Unions inquiry that they were not required crew members at the time of the rule change.
Status quo until that ruling is revealed.
07-03-2009, 12:49 PM
#10
Need More Callouts
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: Unbridled Enthusiasm
Posts: 2,143
Originally Posted by Fly4hire
I think the FAA "ruled" in the language of the FAR and the age at date of implementation. Good luck getting Sim instructors classified as required crew members. Judge tossed it out for good reason, and it is a good indicator where other challenges on that basis will go.
Funny how no other carrier, (or our Union), saw it that way either. By the time the FAA finally does rule on this these clowns will probably all be over 65 anyway.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
