![]() |
Generally there are more FO's that leave through attrition. I wonder if they look at it this way so if they do furlough 300 pilots, then some quit they won't have to wait until they get the furloughed guy back on line to take his place.
|
When calling a reserve, does the 45 minute before departure in domicile from the ops manual apply?
|
Originally Posted by TurboDog
(Post 428768)
When calling a reserve, does the 45 minute before departure in domicile from the ops manual apply?
Just to be save, when your little thing on your belt goes 'beep, beep, beep", just call the friendly folks over at (s)crew scheduling and they will tell you when you have to be there. Have fun! |
Originally Posted by CRJDriver
(Post 428781)
Holy cow CornDog! My head is starting to hurt...:p
Just to be save, when your little thing on your belt goes 'beep, beep, beep", just call the friendly folks over at (s)crew scheduling and they will tell you when you have to be there. Have fun! |
Originally Posted by RiddleEagle18
(Post 428758)
Follow me here for a minute. 150 Downgrades DOES NOT mean only 150 furloughs.
If you are overstaffed by 150 CA's than you are also overstaffed by 150 FO's. To get rid of your 150 overstaffed CA's you downgrade them to FO. Now you are overstaffed by 300 FO's I see what you guys are saying with the numbers listed on the bid and I hope for all of our sakes they will keep the FO side way overstaffed. Based on the bid they will have twice as many FO's in JFK than CA's. It also has 100 more CVG FO's than CVG CA's. if your fat 150 CA but you have 2 times more FOs then CAs then the 300# seems a little off |
Originally Posted by hslightnin
(Post 428818)
can u post some #'s like CA&FO per base
if your fat 150 CA but you have 2 times more FOs then CAs then the 300# seems a little off however based on the displacement bid it seems that the company has decide to keep on a large amount of FO's i.e. JFK CA positions will be reduced to 98. The company is saying that there will be 200 FO positions in JFK. CVG CA positions will be reduced to 347. FO's 469 why keeping such an excess of FO's??? That is everyones question right now. It a good thing for the pilot group because it means alot less furloughs. |
We have Always had more Fo's than Captains. 150 Captains does not equal 150 Fo's. I don't understand it, but it has always been that way.
|
Originally Posted by RiddleEagle18
(Post 428826)
why keeping such an excess of FO's??? That is everyones question right now.
I'm not looking at the memo right now, but I got the sense that Piper's hands were tied; he could bump CAs to the right seat and COLA all day, but furloughs were still over the horizon. And maybe putting 150 captains back on F/O pay is their idea to maintain the attrition rates of the last two years. It still feels like mandatory furloughs are coming, but I'd love to have a chance to bid voluntary before some junior guy gets my furlough slot. |
but if you look at the min/max fo load, even if you add the 150 captains to that fo list we are still within 100. so that is what everyone is confused about.
|
Originally Posted by Thumbs882
(Post 428848)
We have Always had more Fo's than Captains. 150 Captains does not equal 150 Fo's. I don't understand it, but it has always been that way.
The average Comair Captain has been here 14 years. They will have more vacation weeks each year than the average F/O. On the other hand, how many F/Os are doing line checks and recurrent rides? All those guys are Captains. On the list, but not flying. So we should have more captains than F/Os from that standpoint. Some guys would have you believe the senior ALPA pilots (captains??:confused:) are all at conventions, eating steak and lobster on UL instead of flying. So there's more unproductive captains. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:50 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands