Vacancy 20-02V
10-02-2019, 06:08 PM
#142
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2015
Posts: 491
Originally Posted by FlewNavy
Base Trade (Nov 19)
2500ish seniority numbers between the plug and the next guy.
2500ish seniority numbers between the plug and the next guy.
Base trades are like vacation passes, but for bidding.
10-02-2019, 07:45 PM
#144
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2005
Position: 787 FO
Posts: 792
Originally Posted by BAe3100FO
Something seems off with the bottom DCA 777 FO on the junior man list.
Originally Posted by FlewNavy
...Base Trade....
10-03-2019, 02:39 PM
#145
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 97
Originally Posted by O2pilot
Great for him. He got in out of seniority ahead of a bunch of people who want it and have been waiting for it.
Base trades are like vacation passes, but for bidding.
Base trades are like vacation passes, but for bidding.
You have access to the same system he/she did. Maybe set an alarm/reminder on your phone every month to check the base trades.
10-03-2019, 05:55 PM
#146
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2015
Posts: 491
Originally Posted by DoubtingThomas
Don’t be a hater!
You have access to the same system he/she did. Maybe set an alarm/reminder on your phone every month to check the base trades.
You have access to the same system he/she did. Maybe set an alarm/reminder on your phone every month to check the base trades.
An exacerbated example is ORD 320 CAP where a guy gets in well out of seniority on a base trade, and then there is a 777 FO displacement and a bunch of guys pile in on top of him, overfilling the category, and making it so existing pilots who have seniority can't get into that category for (probably) at least a year more.
Its not about hating the people that are there, its about those pilots that have seniority and can't get what their seniority should allow them.
10-03-2019, 06:28 PM
#147
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2015
Position: 777 CA
Posts: 1,029
Originally Posted by O2pilot
It violates seniority. A pilot should not have to commute out of base on the hopes they might get a base trade back in. The current system should only allow a base trade if both pilots have the seniority to hold the base.
An exacerbated example is ORD 320 CAP where a guy gets in well out of seniority on a base trade, and then there is a 777 FO displacement and a bunch of guys pile in on top of him, overfilling the category, and making it so existing pilots who have seniority can't get into that category for (probably) at least a year more.
Its not about hating the people that are there, its about those pilots that have seniority and can't get what their seniority should allow them.
An exacerbated example is ORD 320 CAP where a guy gets in well out of seniority on a base trade, and then there is a 777 FO displacement and a bunch of guys pile in on top of him, overfilling the category, and making it so existing pilots who have seniority can't get into that category for (probably) at least a year more.
Its not about hating the people that are there, its about those pilots that have seniority and can't get what their seniority should allow them.
I do find it ironic that a select few people are talking about a “windfall” for people who are being displaced out of a seat they were awarded through a seniority vacancy bid. We should kick them while they’re down and being bumped so you can benefit??
10-03-2019, 07:28 PM
#148
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2016
Posts: 41
Originally Posted by UALinIAH
What about the seniority of the guy who got into the position he wanted via base trade instead of looking at the junior guy? Maybe he/she got into a base he’s more than senior enough to hold but he couldn’t get there because there hasn’t been a vacancy? Should he/she not be able to use his/her seniority? There’s 2 sides to a base trade. I feel your pain about vacancies but it’s not one sided and anyone can roll the dice and get in the seat they want and hope for a base trade.
I do find it ironic that a select few people are talking about a “windfall” for people who are being displaced out of a seat they were awarded through a seniority vacancy bid. We should kick them while they’re down and being bumped so you can benefit??
I do find it ironic that a select few people are talking about a “windfall” for people who are being displaced out of a seat they were awarded through a seniority vacancy bid. We should kick them while they’re down and being bumped so you can benefit??
10-03-2019, 08:30 PM
#149
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: 787
Posts: 3,130
Originally Posted by O2pilot
It violates seniority. A pilot should not have to commute out of base on the hopes they might get a base trade back in. The current system should only allow a base trade if both pilots have the seniority to hold the base.
An exacerbated example is ORD 320 CAP where a guy gets in well out of seniority on a base trade, and then there is a 777 FO displacement and a bunch of guys pile in on top of him, overfilling the category, and making it so existing pilots who have seniority can't get into that category for (probably) at least a year more.
Its not about hating the people that are there, its about those pilots that have seniority and can't get what their seniority should allow them.
An exacerbated example is ORD 320 CAP where a guy gets in well out of seniority on a base trade, and then there is a 777 FO displacement and a bunch of guys pile in on top of him, overfilling the category, and making it so existing pilots who have seniority can't get into that category for (probably) at least a year more.
Its not about hating the people that are there, its about those pilots that have seniority and can't get what their seniority should allow them.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
