Mesa
08-17-2014 | 01:24 PM
#2491
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
From: Airbus FO
If you are senior and you want the Ejet you should bid VOL if Mesa issues a Standing bid with a reduction in flying in CLT to get downgraded.
If you are really senior and wait until you get INVOL and it is the Final standing bid with the remaining pilots aka it says "ALL" then you waited too late and you can not downgrade. You have to decide how much you want to chance waiting.
If you are Junior, then when you get INVOL during a Reduction, you can bid for FO at that point.
08-17-2014 | 01:49 PM
#2492
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
From: Airbus FO
Ok clarify this for me--as CLT starts downsizing, displaced pilots have these two options per the domicile displacement section of the contract:
1) Remain in CLT in any status or equipment (i.e. a CLT CA can downgrade to CLT FO)
or
2) Occupy any position in your same status and equipment (i.e. a CLT CA can occupy any CRJ CA position).
Would the company try to twist option #2 (occupy same status and equipment) and bar a downgraded CLT FO from bidding EJet Captain?
1) Remain in CLT in any status or equipment (i.e. a CLT CA can downgrade to CLT FO)
or
2) Occupy any position in your same status and equipment (i.e. a CLT CA can occupy any CRJ CA position).
Would the company try to twist option #2 (occupy same status and equipment) and bar a downgraded CLT FO from bidding EJet Captain?
As for the company wanting to keep you from re-upgrading, you were forced by the company to choose either to get moved geographically or by your status/pay. That were the options given to you and they cannot discipline you for them forcing you to make a choice afforded to you by our contract.
There were guys downgraded in the Dash 8 in PHX to FO who were able to bid CRJ CA, but they did not have the seniority to do so, so it was never noticed that it could be done. In this case you have the seniority.
Two times while I was displaced, I displaced into the ERJ as Captain, and then displaced into the CRJ as Captain, with no seat locks what soever because it was not by choice via a displacement. So the company cannot keep you as a CRJ FO if you have the seniority to upgrade to a higher status/equipment aka the Ejet
08-17-2014 | 01:54 PM
#2493
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
From: Airbus FO
From our contract
"No equipment commitments exist for First Officers, however a First Officer shall only be allowed to bid into a higher paying turbo-jet captain position"
So you are good to bid EJet as a CRJ FO even after you got downgraded. There are guys who were downgraded from the CRJ before who are bidding the EJet as Captains now.
"No equipment commitments exist for First Officers, however a First Officer shall only be allowed to bid into a higher paying turbo-jet captain position"
So you are good to bid EJet as a CRJ FO even after you got downgraded. There are guys who were downgraded from the CRJ before who are bidding the EJet as Captains now.
08-17-2014 | 02:58 PM
#2494
Banned
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
How would displacements affect hiring?
08-17-2014 | 03:10 PM
#2495
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,539
Likes: 0
From: 175 Left
It wouldn't.
Think of it simply like this:
CRJ CA John Smith downgrades to CRJ FO John Smith to stay in CLT.
CRJ FO John Doe upgrades to (whichever CRJ base he can hold) CRJ CA to fill the vacancy CRJ CA John Smith created when downgraded.
This triggers an FO vacancy that must be filled with a new hire.
Doesn't matter which position CRJ or EJET an FO upgrades to, it still creates the same amount of FO vacancies that must be filled by new hires.
There is no net loss of aircraft, there's is a net gain. Think for every new aircraft we need 5 more FOs.
Think of it simply like this:
CRJ CA John Smith downgrades to CRJ FO John Smith to stay in CLT.
CRJ FO John Doe upgrades to (whichever CRJ base he can hold) CRJ CA to fill the vacancy CRJ CA John Smith created when downgraded.
This triggers an FO vacancy that must be filled with a new hire.
Doesn't matter which position CRJ or EJET an FO upgrades to, it still creates the same amount of FO vacancies that must be filled by new hires.
There is no net loss of aircraft, there's is a net gain. Think for every new aircraft we need 5 more FOs.
08-17-2014 | 03:13 PM
#2496
Banned
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
It wouldn't.
Think of it simply like this:
CRJ CA John Smith downgrades to CRJ FO John Smith to stay in CLT.
CRJ FO John Doe upgrades to (whichever CRJ base he can hold) CRJ CA to fill the vacancy CRJ CA John Smith created when downgraded.
This triggers an FO vacancy that must be filled with a new hire.
Doesn't matter which position CRJ or EJET an FO upgrades to, it still creates the same amount of FO vacancies that must be filled by new hires.
There is no net loss of aircraft, there's is a net gain. Think for every new aircraft we need 5 more FOs.
Think of it simply like this:
CRJ CA John Smith downgrades to CRJ FO John Smith to stay in CLT.
CRJ FO John Doe upgrades to (whichever CRJ base he can hold) CRJ CA to fill the vacancy CRJ CA John Smith created when downgraded.
This triggers an FO vacancy that must be filled with a new hire.
Doesn't matter which position CRJ or EJET an FO upgrades to, it still creates the same amount of FO vacancies that must be filled by new hires.
There is no net loss of aircraft, there's is a net gain. Think for every new aircraft we need 5 more FOs.
08-17-2014 | 03:20 PM
#2497
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,539
Likes: 0
From: 175 Left
How about that company update. I don't think they could have made it much more obvious about more aircraft if they highlighted and underlined We have secured a line of credit for new aircraft in the last paragraph of the email.
08-17-2014 | 04:09 PM
#2500
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,539
Likes: 0
From: 175 Left
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beech90
How would displacements affect hiring?
It wouldn't.
Think of it simply like this:
CRJ CA John Smith downgrades to CRJ FO John Smith to stay in CLT.
CRJ FO John Doe upgrades to (whichever CRJ base he can hold) CRJ CA to fill the vacancy CRJ CA John Smith created when downgraded.
This triggers an FO vacancy that must be filled with a new hire.
Doesn't matter which position CRJ or EJET an FO upgrades to, it still creates the same amount of FO vacancies that must be filled by new hires.
There is no net loss of aircraft, there's is a net gain. Think for every new aircraft we need 5 more FOs.
Originally Posted by Beech90
How would displacements affect hiring?
It wouldn't.
Think of it simply like this:
CRJ CA John Smith downgrades to CRJ FO John Smith to stay in CLT.
CRJ FO John Doe upgrades to (whichever CRJ base he can hold) CRJ CA to fill the vacancy CRJ CA John Smith created when downgraded.
This triggers an FO vacancy that must be filled with a new hire.
Doesn't matter which position CRJ or EJET an FO upgrades to, it still creates the same amount of FO vacancies that must be filled by new hires.
There is no net loss of aircraft, there's is a net gain. Think for every new aircraft we need 5 more FOs.
For every new aircraft we need 10 new hires + 1 or 2 (for attrition)
5 new hires per plane to fill the right seat of whichever aircraft. (EJET or CRJ)
5 more new hire to cover the vacancy the upgrading CA just created in the right seat of the CRJ.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
