Can some of you CAL guys or gals tell me about the following:

In a recent conversation I had with a CAL pilot I was informed that a contract which had a 20% pay increase (over current CAL rate) but cut the cap to 85 hours would be considered a pay cut and this pilot would vote NO! (Yes he shouted).

But a moment later this pilot told me how constantly "tired" he was. He was tired (using a leading expletive) when he went to work, tired when he got home, tired while he worked and so on.

I guess I don't get it, working 100 hours with 10 - 13 days off for the money and being dead tired all the time is a good thing, but yet working 15% less with a 20% pay raise is a cut/bad?

Please help me with this, I have always tried to work less. I'm one of those who when contract 2000 (UAL) came around I dropped my hours to 70.

I guess what I'm also asking is, where's the balance between "productivity" (more hours = more money) and life not in an airplane?

 

Welcome to our world, where when it comes to money and contracts, logic has stubbornly refused to pay a visit, much less make a home.

 

Pay cap of 85 hours? The way I see it is that I want options. If I want to work and get payed more then 85 hours I should be able to do it. Conversely I don't like it when all the line are built to 90 hours every month. It should my option to kill myself at work.

 

Regularguy, you didn't even mention the hidden benefit of lower caps. Increased staffing needs means larger equipment available or higher seniority within the equipment that he's on.

 

A lot of CAL pilots are stupid. Sorry guys, its true. They work more to make up for a reduction in pay. It should be the other way around. It's time we turn it around. I say no to picking up time, Jr. manning of any kind, working during my vacation, etc.

Here's a sticker for our flight bags:

Less work, more pay!

 

"It should my option to kill myself at work. "

I agree to a point and after many years of this I am in favor of the latter, restricting hours to a cap.

Why:

1. It provides more jobs. Yes a union is about employment.
2. It provides more opportunity for a larger majority of people. However, Jr. is always Jr., a fact which will never be fixed. The only thing a contract can do is make being Jr. more tolerable and equitable with the Sr.
3. It provides a greater level of safety, meaning it forces people to "not kill themselves" at a safety centered job like piloting. Of course there are always those who will burn the candle on their days off and come to work to rest (note they start that 8 day international all nighter tired).
4. No matter how they structure it the company will require a stable scheduling plan (work rules) for reliability. They can't have half the work force flying 100 hours one month and then they (the work force) turn it off and fly 75 the next. No way to staff for such events and thus many will be forced to work 100 hrs a month when they want to work 75.

 

I don't disagree with anything that you put but instead of making it a pay cap make it a line construction cap. Put the limitations on the company not on us.

 

More of THIS!!

 

LESS of this !!

 

The company already figured that out with PBS. They control ALL parameters of it. In the peak of travel season, holidays, etc, regardless of what you request, it will do everything it can to maximize your flying. You can bid award work low, set line value to low....doesn't work. So, us "non-stupid" types at Cal self adjust. But I shouldn't have to do that. I should be able to request 80 hr max line value 12 months out of the year. We are NOT migrant workers. If PBS isn't enhanced with this contract...it's a resounding "NO". Regardless.

(Sorry for thread drift.)