Search

Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

CAL System Bid

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-18-2009 | 02:35 PM
  #21  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 929
Likes: 0
From: e190
Default

I dont think this flying is going to the xjt rjs because we are being cut back almost double the % reduction in September block hours. The CHQ crj's are slowly leaving and will be totally gone by early 2010, the new q400's arent coming until end of summer 2010 and are supposedly going to be replacing a lot of the saab and rj routes down in IAH, and Commutair is apparently staying pretty much status quo into the fall.

What is the total reduction in block hours on the 73 system wide?

I am hoping this is just a management scare tactic that has the opposite affect and is used as ammo for the union. I dont think anybody needs reminding that scope is protecting your job but this just might scare the really dense individuals into getting educated on the subject.
Reply
Old 08-18-2009 | 03:02 PM
  #22  
SoCalGuy's Avatar
Keep Calm Chive ON
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,086
Likes: 0
From: Boeing's Plastic Jet Button Pusher - 787
Default

Originally Posted by newarkblows
I dont think this flying is going to the xjt rjs because we are being cut back almost double the % reduction in September block hours. The CHQ crj's are slowly leaving and will be totally gone by early 2010, the new q400's arent coming until end of summer 2010 and are supposedly going to be replacing a lot of the saab and rj routes down in IAH, and Commutair is apparently staying pretty much status quo into the fall.

What is the total reduction in block hours on the 73 system wide?

I am hoping this is just a management scare tactic that has the opposite affect and is used as ammo for the union. I dont think anybody needs reminding that scope is protecting your job but this just might scare the really dense individuals into getting educated on the subject.
I would tend to agree with your statement of some of this shift involving 'scare tactics'.

Looking at Freddy's Flt Ops Update (which I normally mark return to sender) for Aug'09, it states:

Fall (Sep-Dec) 2008 flying hrs were 257K hours
vs
Fall (Sep-Dec) 2009 flying hrs are projected 247K hours
....= 3.7% reduction.....the above pertains to "Crew Block Hours".

With a good amount of reductions in the NE, it sure seems like a rather 'large' amount for 'just' a simple 3.7% reduction. About 2/3's of the entire update had lots of 'fuzzy' math. All in all, I do agree there is more to this being just simple reductions.

Last edited by SoCalGuy; 08-18-2009 at 05:40 PM.
Reply
Old 08-18-2009 | 03:16 PM
  #23  
757Driver's Avatar
Need More Callouts
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,143
Likes: 0
From: Unbridled Enthusiasm
Default

Not to mention that the EWR Flight Attendant base isn't being reduced at all.

Can you say Law Suit?
Reply
Old 08-18-2009 | 05:39 PM
  #24  
SoCalGuy's Avatar
Keep Calm Chive ON
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,086
Likes: 0
From: Boeing's Plastic Jet Button Pusher - 787
Default

Originally Posted by 757Driver
Not to mention that the EWR Flight Attendant base isn't being reduced at all.

Can you say Law Suit?
I have asked the same thing, how come they 'don't' jive when it comes to Flt Dk vs FA staffing reductions on a relative scale when it comes to common base/crewing. The answer I got last week from the IAH office was lots of the fall/winter flying through EWR will be done by IAH Flt Dk crews, but FA staffing will not be done in the same planning model - keeping EWR domestic FA crews flying similar to present day planning.....does anyone agree this makes sense?? Sounds like Greek for, "smoke and mirrors".

757Driver....what's this about your slant on a law suit concerning the topic?? Do explain your take. I agree, it all smells like a 'big steamer'.
Reply
Old 08-18-2009 | 05:42 PM
  #25  
757Driver's Avatar
Need More Callouts
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,143
Likes: 0
From: Unbridled Enthusiasm
Default

Originally Posted by SoCalGuy
757Driver....what's this about your hinting of a law suit on the topic?? Do explain your take. I agree, it all smells like a 'big steamer'.
There's a move a-foot to take the company to task for violating the status quo by falsely reducing the more militant EWR base.
Reply
Old 08-18-2009 | 05:46 PM
  #26  
SoCalGuy's Avatar
Keep Calm Chive ON
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,086
Likes: 0
From: Boeing's Plastic Jet Button Pusher - 787
Default

Originally Posted by 757Driver
There's a move a-foot to take the company to task for violating the status quo by falsely reducing the more militant EWR base.
I would hope so.....Has Baron said anything about pursuing that for sure?? Beckman has been a 'welth' of information down south, not.
Reply
Old 08-18-2009 | 06:34 PM
  #27  
TheQuan's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Default

From my understanding EWR has A LOT of commuters. That said, They are now increasing the number of commuters in the system since there are pilots getting reduced to IAH that actually can drive to work in EWR. Plus replacing routes with RJ's/Props. There's only one more way to really mess with the pilot group and our contract is already dog$#!t. Sounds to me like management is really trying to break us and not realizing that they are only fueling the fire of unity. FUPM
Reply
Old 08-19-2009 | 06:14 AM
  #28  
HOSED BY PBS AGAIN
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,713
Likes: 0
Default

And we're also ADDING TWO new CP's while cutting the bases to the core? That really makes sense. The B737's had almost 580 CA's last year and they are reducing them to 292? I haven't had but 10-15 seats in TOTAL empty in my last 15 pairings or so. We are paying a HUGE amount of bumping/oversold compensation too. Wow.........worst to first and back again in record time. Sad............
Reply
Old 08-19-2009 | 10:20 AM
  #29  
Boneman's Avatar
Thread Starter
I love my job!
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
From: B757 Capt
Default

Originally Posted by 757Driver
There's a move a-foot to take the company to task for violating the status quo by falsely reducing the more militant EWR base.
I haven't heard a thing. The Union has been suspiciously silent about the whole situation. In the mean time I’ll be looking forward to sliding back into reserve for the first time in 12 years. But at least I have a wife.
Reply
Old 08-19-2009 | 10:28 AM
  #30  
Captain Bligh's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 791
Likes: 0
Default

Adding two CPs may be necessary just to handle the logistics of all of the hotel rooms and transportation that will be needed to staff a portion of EWR out of IAH. If management knows this is going to be expensive on the front side, imagine how much money they are greedily thinking they will save on the back side "once they bust the union". The most money I'd ever made was when out of base flying was done without TDY staffing. Add 6 hours of round trip DH to every pairing you fly and you may have a hard time spending all the money. There are daily pairings being built that DH IAH pilots on both ends of a EWR-Europe trip now. Even at paltry CAL FO pay rates it adds up.

This decision needs to be challenged in court, in a jurisdiction other than Houston TX, if for no other reason than to test how the courts rule on union busting under the Obama administration.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Precontact
Cargo
21
06-03-2009 05:56 AM
fr8rcaptain
Cargo
239
02-12-2009 09:31 AM
Lester Burnham
Cargo
29
02-11-2009 02:56 PM
scrapdog
Major
7
01-28-2009 08:10 PM
Daytripper
Major
4
01-17-2009 05:21 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