I agree it is unlikely but don’t underestimate what they will do if they they feel have to.

 

I haven’t flown with any pilot who thinks this is a problem… most think pilots will fill the spots quickly. They also don’t share the “safety” thoughts most who don’t like the section are peddling. All of these pilots have come from a regional… haven’t flown with a mil pilot to ask.

 

Which is a big part of my concern. Few kids at the regionals will pass on a job w/ great long-term growth prospects just to avoid the short-term “golden seat lock” on a $300K position. However, some of them will likely be quietly uncomfortable with the responsibility.

Bottom line for me is if you don’t feel ready, you’re not ready- extra IOE hours aside. The pilot’s personal determination is the first safety gate that we are knocking down. We all understand human factors well enough to be honest & say yes, someone can be pressured into an unsafe situation, especially when the stakes (e.g., their livelihood) are high; and I think this provision makes it highly likely that we’ll put some number of pilots in those seats that- in their heart of hearts- aren’t comfortable being there. It’s not a problem until it is.

Funny how we’re all opposed to a 135 carve-out for SkyWest (that could hurt our paychecks) on safety grounds, but fully comfortable with forced upgrades here that come with Section 3 & a retro check.

 

That plan you saw is not an official master plan for EWR….

 

I’m not sure if lowering BES in Houston is in the future, the cost would be quite high to displace. I don’t think ORD or DEN has seen any outside the norm growth on the 737/320 that couldn’t be attributed to Covid rebound. IAH will prob stagnate for a while

 

We are? According to whom? Because we're filling classes, most aren't jumping ship, and every guy I talk to still on probation is in favor of this contract. I've also talked extensively with FACT team members about this, and I've seen multiple falsehoods about 8-F-12 just in this thread. The most egregious of which is the BS "safety" argument.

I caution anyone reading this to not believe what they see on the internet, and to go talk to an actual human being about this if 8-F-12 is that big of a sticking point.

 

So the FACT team was able to assure you there are no safety concerns with assigning upgrade to someone who may not personally feel ready? Sounds kind of like an opinion to me.

 

1) Definitely the lowest floor for QOL, even with the new contract.

2) And basically what you're saying is if it's a concern for you, just go talk to someone who doesn't care about it and let them tell you how it's not an issue.

 

No, they simply laid out the actual facts so that i could form a reasonable opinion based on that. Maybe that's a foreign concept for some, idk.

The prerequisites, combined with the sheer amount of guardrails, training with LCA's, checking events, and oversight is a lot safer than, say, a new hire reserve bunkie forced into SFO 777 trying to escape a seat lock after 1 year. Or, hell, a 20 year career bunkie who upgrades and barely passes training by the skin of their teeth, both of which happen already, but I sure don't see the same energy for either of those scenarios.

 

Ok, so based on nothing. Got it.