The silver lining is that the extra 15 minutes a day gets us closer to our line construction windows during monthly bidding. Whether it equates to more time off depends on the pilot's category and amount of vacation days that month so it'll be hit or miss. Don't get me wrong, I like the extra pay but it still greatly lags our 5:15 ADG.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

And to add to the VB info, MCO has from day one been at the top of a very short list of initial test VBs so I'd be surprised if it isn't the first one. That could make the program a success because we still have tons of commuters from there and the surrounding cities within driving distance.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

How would virtual basing undermine seniority? I suppose I could understand that argument if the monthly bid packages were relatively consistent, but on the 73 they seem to change month to month.

Here are some links to previous threads on the subject that might answer your question and then some:

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/un...ite-bases.html

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/un...te-basing.html

I think the only think all pilots agree on regarding VBs is that they are controversial. I think Dave F. touched on something important, for it to work it has to be seen as a win/win proposition. Under previous management here, I don't think that was possible. With new management repeatedly stating the desire to build trust with employee groups, win/win is no longer inconceivable. DAL's test will be interesting to watch in the meantime.

Agreed. I think it could work here, but has to have properly motivated people on both sides, not just ALPA. SEA and PDX both come to mind. Maybe PHX, LAS? I'm sure something in Florida, like MCO, Delta might consider, would help a lot of guys too.

But I guess that all depends on who buys JB.

It doesn't undermine seniority. Pilots bid using their seniority and a more senior pilot can volunteer to fly out of that virtual base. It violates seniority as much as a base trade.

If the company can support an additional pilot domicile, there are current contractual requirements and pilot benefits already on the books.

Will a virtual base provide:

Systemwide bid for all pilots to preference the new BES?
Paid moves?
PS Pass travel for at least 6 months while pilots move?
Base Trades?

There are more, but if the answer to any of the questions above is no, than virtual basing absolutely abrogates pilot seniority. Follow the contract.

Paid moves? Man I hope that's TIC. The whole idea for VBs is to be able to move crews around as the market dictates. There's no way in hell the company will pay for moves. VBs will mostly benefit commuters. Anyone who leaves a contractual base and moves to a VB is an idiot of the first order. There will be no guarantee that any VB will be open for a defined period of time unless an LOA is agreed to after the program starts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I get that, and I'll repeat that virtual bases abrogate pilot seniority and undermines the CBA. I'm a commuter and I know how commutes can suck, but gutting this section of the contract isn't the answer.

If it dilutes the quantity and quality of flying in an existing base without the contractual provisions of a new Base (such as you mention), it does indeed abrogate seniority. If there's enough flying in a particular city, open a base and allow people to bid into it per the seniority list. For example, hundreds (if not thousands) of pilots have chosen to live, at great expense, within driving distance of SFO. Now, open a "virtual base" in Portland Oregon; the trip pool in SFO diminishes and negatively impacts the livelihood / QOL of the person living in California at the expense of the commuters that now enjoy a lower cost of living AND the ability to drive to work.