Line pilots to be "pretend" students for TK
04-10-2018, 10:02 AM
#51
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 756 left
Posts: 753
Originally Posted by guppie
And PLEASE don't start the whole "manpower negative" narrative. That's just a union word for limiting a pilot's ability to make some serious cheddar.
Modify lineholder vacation classification (move from Add Pay) and permit Pilots to voluntarily fly over vacation
Discuss applicability of Flight Time FARs for unaugmented flying
Permit Pilots to voluntarily fly further below minimum days off
Discuss crew notification of international delays
Discuss reserve Pilots’ first day of availability
Increase ability to fly large regional aircraft
The question is rhetorical but I hope it helps you see the fallacy in your post.
04-10-2018, 10:14 AM
#52
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: guppy CA
Posts: 5,160
Originally Posted by 89Pistons
Some of you can't see that this is a trial balloon. Take a look at the Company wish list. There is this item below...
--Discuss Instructor/Evaluators (e.g., permit retired Pilots to be Instructors), modify
Instructor/Evaluator reassignment and release rules and introduce line flying flex--
Try to look past this month of May offer. They don't want to do this to increase the number of PI's in the building. They want to be able to reduce the number of PI's in the future. And I think they want to be able to have one instructor run the sim and do your seat support at the same time. They basically want to hire FTI's to not only do your FTDA's but your FTDB's and sim training too.
--Discuss Instructor/Evaluators (e.g., permit retired Pilots to be Instructors), modify
Instructor/Evaluator reassignment and release rules and introduce line flying flex--
Try to look past this month of May offer. They don't want to do this to increase the number of PI's in the building. They want to be able to reduce the number of PI's in the future. And I think they want to be able to have one instructor run the sim and do your seat support at the same time. They basically want to hire FTI's to not only do your FTDA's but your FTDB's and sim training too.
There are some things that United can unilaterally change in the way it trains pilots. Most stuff, however, is dictated by the FAA and would require their permission for United to alter our Ops Specs. If it sounds the least bit nuts (single PI both running a sim and being seat support), it's extremely unlikely to get past the FAA POI.
Now, just to close the loop. Do you know of any US certificated airline that's permitted to use other than line pilots for simulator training? I don't have the answer, but I'd be surprised if that's permitted for any US carrier.
04-10-2018, 10:16 AM
#53
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: guppy CA
Posts: 5,160
Originally Posted by Otters
This isnt' hard to compute: Read section 23 and you know exactly what a I/E makes. Its based on what he can hold F/O(not standard captains for this discussion) at 9 year widebody first officer cap. Then add 800-1300 per month depending on what your evaluator status is.
then there is a max of 3 overtime events. end of story. no rumor just facts.
The CQ cancellations are on one fleet primarily, the 737. Ask council 93 why this is happening. It has to do with a hangover where privilege determined who would be checked out to do events such as CQ. There are large numbers who have been left idle for up to two years. They aren't short. They are underutilized because an instructor has not been fully checked out in all events.
then there is a max of 3 overtime events. end of story. no rumor just facts.
The CQ cancellations are on one fleet primarily, the 737. Ask council 93 why this is happening. It has to do with a hangover where privilege determined who would be checked out to do events such as CQ. There are large numbers who have been left idle for up to two years. They aren't short. They are underutilized because an instructor has not been fully checked out in all events.
04-10-2018, 10:22 AM
#54
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 756 left
Posts: 753
Originally Posted by Andy
CI'm not able to draw the same conclusion, much less the concept of allowing a single PI both run the sim and do seat support in a sim.
04-10-2018, 10:25 AM
#55
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 756 left
Posts: 753
Originally Posted by Andy
I'm too lazy to look it up. Since you sound familiar, what's the max number of credit hours a PI can get per month? And how much does that change when (s)he flies a trip or two?
04-10-2018, 11:00 AM
#56
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Posts: 174
Originally Posted by Andy
I'm too lazy to look it up. Since you sound familiar, what's the max number of credit hours a PI can get per month? And how much does that change when (s)he flies a trip or two?
04-10-2018, 11:01 AM
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Posts: 153
Originally Posted by 89Pistons
I'm not a PI but have been told that they do not get paid any extra for additional "fly days." They get 90 hours capped at 9th year WB FO pay, an override, and OT if their fleet is short (schedules being screwed up by FOX).
04-10-2018, 11:04 AM
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Posts: 174
Originally Posted by 89Pistons
Would you be surprised that it is in fact already allowed on certain event types, procedures for it listed in the FSTM, and has already been done on some LDRQ's and warm ups?
04-10-2018, 11:08 AM
#59
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Posts: 174
[QUOTE=Andy;2569132]Call me stupid. I'm not able to draw the same conclusion, much less the concept of allowing a single PI both run the sim and do seat support in a sim. And I seriously doubt that United's FAA POI would ever sign off on that. Same goes with FTIs doing FTDBs.
There are some things that United can unilaterally change in the way it trains pilots. Most stuff, however, is dictated by the FAA and would require their permission for United to alter our Ops Specs. If it sounds the least bit nuts (single PI both running a sim and being seat support), it's extremely unlikely to get past the FAA POI.
IT IS APPROVED BY THE FAA POI...... ITS IN THE AQP DOCUMENT FACT!!!!!!!!! Your assumption is incorrect.
T.K. is doing this. It's a fact and its legal. The union is adamantly opposed to this practice and we are fighting it.
There are some things that United can unilaterally change in the way it trains pilots. Most stuff, however, is dictated by the FAA and would require their permission for United to alter our Ops Specs. If it sounds the least bit nuts (single PI both running a sim and being seat support), it's extremely unlikely to get past the FAA POI.
IT IS APPROVED BY THE FAA POI...... ITS IN THE AQP DOCUMENT FACT!!!!!!!!! Your assumption is incorrect.
T.K. is doing this. It's a fact and its legal. The union is adamantly opposed to this practice and we are fighting it.
04-10-2018, 11:25 AM
#60
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2018
Position: B-737 Captain
Posts: 653
Originally Posted by 89Pistons
I suppose you'd like to give away these provisions that are referenced on the company's wish list so you have the opportunity to make some "serious cheddar?" Because it sounds like you're saying that the current manpower positive provisions in the contract are keeping you from making more "serious cheddar."
Modify lineholder vacation classification (move from Add Pay) and permit Pilots to voluntarily fly over vacation
Discuss applicability of Flight Time FARs for unaugmented flying
Permit Pilots to voluntarily fly further below minimum days off
Discuss crew notification of international delays
Discuss reserve Pilots’ first day of availability
Increase ability to fly large regional aircraft
The question is rhetorical but I hope it helps you see the fallacy in your post.
Modify lineholder vacation classification (move from Add Pay) and permit Pilots to voluntarily fly over vacation
Discuss applicability of Flight Time FARs for unaugmented flying
Permit Pilots to voluntarily fly further below minimum days off
Discuss crew notification of international delays
Discuss reserve Pilots’ first day of availability
Increase ability to fly large regional aircraft
The question is rhetorical but I hope it helps you see the fallacy in your post.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
