That is the kind of thinking that got us the "B" scale. It is very easy to pick apart almost any part of our contract besides pay and create dissension in the ranks.

I understand that we will have to compromise but concessions, really?

Scoop

Well, I see having the trip off with pay and not having to work with LCA flying as an easter egg in the contract that benefits a few, but not everyone. And yes, I've enjoyed a few of them and would probably in the future.

Not the same as the B scale because that was splitting the group into haves and have nots.

If recovery flying was reinstated, what would happen is that LCA trips would go junior again. Sometimes a junior FO would get a relatively senior trip because he wasn't able to "avoid LCAs". He/she may fly with the LCA or may get bought off and be subject to some sort of reserve commitment for the same time period which we all know means they are getting used.

My only point is that this particular easter egg, no matter how hard fought for, provides for the most identifiable inefficiency that the company could try and negotiate out of the contract again for the next decade.

That has a price, I think that Hockey said 2% across the board pay raise is not enough, but I suppose there is a number that a majority of the pilots would think is fair compensation for removing the easter egg.

I don't agree that comparing this to a B scale is accurate. That would be like saying that A319 pilots should make more than M90 pilots despite the fact that the M90 holds more revenue and commands more attention from it's pilots, that would be divisive!

Well I don't know, what if the contract just went to 2000 adjusted for inflation? If the LCA provision is in there, is it time to mutiny?

Everything is a concession to someone.

Revcovery with protections is very different from witholding trips entirely. Any change is selling jobs. Jobs that we already bought by selling jobs to agree to the new hire freeze in the first place. Now we are going to possibly sell back the jobs we bought by selling jobs and end up with less jobs than when we started. Dumb move IMO.

If OE buyoffs are really such an important issue for the company (and us because the benefit is disproportional etc) they should have ZERO PROBLEM with enacting a recovery with numerous protections as well as additional offset staffing positive (for us) improvements elsewhere to make up for it.

Same report or later.
Same release or earlier.
Greater day by day credit.
Original trip redeye/WOCL protections honored.
Only one pairing for one pairing (no stacking/ second bite at the apple) with hotels in domicile if needed.
If original trip started or ended with a DH, the new trip must fit inside the first and last revenue leg report/release times.
And we get manning positives for everyone to offset the job losses.

We already sold jobs to get what we have. Witholding OE trips from the bid is a devistating concession that guts every FO categoty and hammers staffing.

Add in pay and credit for both trips, no invol assignment if RES Avail>RES Req and you might be getting close. Trips need to be desirable and go senior.....junior guys have enough going on and shouldn't have to deal with a turd like this also.

Either way we have to unite against trip removal. That would be a massive unprecedented concession during times of record unprecedented profits. Whiskey Tango Fud?

Anyone care to reveal the rep? Publicly or PM will work.

Well that I would agree. Trip pull effects the whole pilot group top to bottom, well maybe not the very top, but very close to it.

I'm not arguing for any changes, but just pointing out that having no recovery provision (regardless or inclusive of as many restrictions possible) should be what the company is after and should be willing to pay for.

I love this story.

Sell us your thoughts on including the AF/KLM grievance into C2015! How much do we get for that? I'm going to go buy a yacht.

The sad fact is these concessions are all self funding.

If Delta makes $500 trillion dollars a day do we still have to make concessions? Or whatever your calling them to make it hurt less.

Wrong...It effects a very large number of first officers over time..As guys move on and upgrade it opens up bidding with LCA to more junior FO's. Not to mention the junior guys who have LCA swap into their trip..You sound like someone from ALPA trying to justify this concession. And it is a HUGE concession.