H.r.1586
03-24-2010 | 07:21 AM
#11
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
Welcome to a non-union company. Ya better get used to "what we get... they get", and plan your rhetoric accordingly. But more to the point, Call in "Stupid" is devisive... why don't you leave that kind of crap at home.
03-24-2010 | 07:22 AM
#12
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
I agree Nu, something that needs to be fixed.
I know what their fear is, but with the study and confer part of the legislation they are showing their desire. The cannot control where you live. If they require a set time in domicile prior to report, that will further reduce the QOL of commuters. IMO you will see a lot of guys make the decision to either a) retire, and or b) go find employment at carriers closer to home.
I know many people that moved once for this job and will never do it again.
I know what their fear is, but with the study and confer part of the legislation they are showing their desire. The cannot control where you live. If they require a set time in domicile prior to report, that will further reduce the QOL of commuters. IMO you will see a lot of guys make the decision to either a) retire, and or b) go find employment at carriers closer to home.
I know many people that moved once for this job and will never do it again.
03-24-2010 | 07:54 AM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,107
Likes: 103
You call it divisive. We call it "telling people how it really is", which most of us in 20 VASTLY prefer. But if you want to keep burying your head in the sand, better buy some q-tips to clean out yer ears.
Nu
03-24-2010 | 06:31 PM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 72
From: Legacy FO
I agree Nu, something that needs to be fixed.
I know what their fear is, but with the study and confer part of the legislation they are showing their desire. The cannot control where you live. If they require a set time in domicile prior to report, that will further reduce the QOL of commuters. IMO you will see a lot of guys make the decision to either a) retire, and or b) go find employment at carriers closer to home.
I know many people that moved once for this job and will never do it again.
I know what their fear is, but with the study and confer part of the legislation they are showing their desire. The cannot control where you live. If they require a set time in domicile prior to report, that will further reduce the QOL of commuters. IMO you will see a lot of guys make the decision to either a) retire, and or b) go find employment at carriers closer to home.
I know many people that moved once for this job and will never do it again.
Yes, I drive to work. No, I don't commute ... yet. I know it can happen to me. However, I cringe everytime I walk into JFK or LGA and find people sleeping overnight right next to the TVs, V-files, etc.etc. It's ridiculous. I've bought myself a hotel room for early morning report times. I guess I'm over thinking this airline pilot thing.
03-24-2010 | 07:05 PM
#15
Moderator
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,634
Likes: 0
From: Tiki bar
03-24-2010 | 08:51 PM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
From: Fero's
03-24-2010 | 10:37 PM
#18
7.27%
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 543
Likes: 0
From: Boeing
The feds have given us the power already via the FARs. If your tired, fatigued, etc. then call in fatigued. We're probably not going to like what the bureaucrats come up with anyway. What was the last idea they proposed, something like less duty time and more flying time. 
Pt P
Pt P
Last edited by Palmtree Pilot; 03-25-2010 at 05:33 AM.
03-25-2010 | 04:59 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 72
From: Legacy FO
I agree with Palmetree Pilot. This has me very worried about what they might come up with. It could be the nail in the coffin for this industry if they totally screw it up.
If they go too conservative, it definitely could ruin quality of life and for some, make it financially impossible.
Imagine for those who only take home $1500/month, having to spend an extra 3-4 days on the road because duty days were shortened or you had to present yourself to work the day before if you were a commuter.
Guess that wise old saying, becareful what you wish for, comes to play here.
If they go too conservative, it definitely could ruin quality of life and for some, make it financially impossible.
Imagine for those who only take home $1500/month, having to spend an extra 3-4 days on the road because duty days were shortened or you had to present yourself to work the day before if you were a commuter.
Guess that wise old saying, becareful what you wish for, comes to play here.
03-25-2010 | 08:40 AM
#20
No longer cares
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 12,109
Likes: 0
From: 767er Captain
We can call it that now because when NWA had the same policy years ago, that's what we called it then.
You call it divisive. We call it "telling people how it really is", which most of us in 20 VASTLY prefer. But if you want to keep burying your head in the sand, better buy some q-tips to clean out yer ears.
Nu
You call it divisive. We call it "telling people how it really is", which most of us in 20 VASTLY prefer. But if you want to keep burying your head in the sand, better buy some q-tips to clean out yer ears.
Nu
Nice.......
