Go ahead Sheep. BK is beyond right.

I get why people keep pushing for a JA or OT ban, but I think this post actually highlights why right now may not be the right moment for one. Too much emotionally charged chest thumping without calmly taking a look at the bigger picture.

Before the accident, I was very much pro-ban. At that time, the goal was not to make the company pay more for flying, but to make the flying not happen at all. Capacity was tight, demand was high, and if pilots collectively refused JA and OT, the schedule would break. That leverage only works when the company does not have realistic and plentiful alternatives.

Since the accident, the game has changed. The company now has several ways to move the boxes without relying on IPA pilots, with emergency authority and ACMI lift being the big differentiators. Increased management flying and aggressive use of revisions are also part of that picture, often paired with denied premiums to absorb flying at straight time.

If you are watching OT, the bait-and-switch trips are hard to miss. One leg out, long layover, then CML home. That layover is often just a revision window that keeps you operating inside the trip footprint without additional credit. That is a good reason to be selective about OT, but the larger point is that the company will still find a way to move the box. When it happens, ER it. Ensure OT trips are legal and document them when they are not. CRS is fully aware they are pushing non-contractual revisions and skeleton trips into OT, and their systems flag it even if ours does not.

In this environment, a broad refusal of JA or OT does not stop the flying. It just shifts it, and more of the work ends up with contractors or management crews.

I also understand the anger toward pilots flying JA or OT. I felt it myself looking at the JA list months ago, and I understand the “piggies at the trough” comments. That mindset made sense when refusing premium flying actually broke the schedule. Today, with a full rainbow of tails on the ramp and revisions soaking up flying at straight time, it feels incomplete. We either fly the work or watch it get chopped up and revised out of another back-end CML. The pay is a side effect of protecting scope and schedules.

There is also the union side. BT recently mentioned the possibility of a dues increase and repeatedly emphasized “fatiguing schedules” as a core issue. He did not allude to a JA or OT ban. Less IPA flying means less dues, which weakens the union when it needs to be well funded for negotiations, enforcement, and litigation.

That does not mean pilots are out of options. Honest fatigue calls matter. Paying attention to revisions and contractual compliance matters. Writing ERs for bait-and-switch trips, denied premiums, and changing company behavior matters. Those records give the union leverage with the mediator, especially if the company continues to drag its feet.

When it comes to mediation, who looks like the bad sport when the pilots are pulling their weight and the union walks in with a bucket full of proof that the company isn’t? I don’t think we should place ourselves in the “find out” stage, but I’m all for building a case to put them squarely in it!

You must not have flown at any other airline, and must have had an easy time in the military…

It will have no effect on me since you’re junior to me, but if you are going to leave, why wait for an upgrade that might be 2 to 3 years away? The difference between a 12 year career and a 15 year career at Delta/UA/AA/SW could be well over a million $$ (think 3 more years as a top of the scale captain there). You would spend your 50s doing the type of flying you want, and you would get to the left seat there years earlier than you would by waiting around here.

I’d settle for that! Either way something is wrong and needs to be fixed. FFS we have Harbor Freight straps that are used to secure us as we hang out the door of a running airplane to conduct a PTOCC.

All any individual has to barter with is our time. That's true in life, and also true at work. We all work to provide for ourselves and our families, and owe X amount of time in exchange for guarantee. When it comes to voluntarily working "more", individuals have to make a decision if their time is best spent at work or best spent not at work. While such a decision about the value of our time can be situational and/or influenced by recommendations, its ultimately a decision each individual always has to make for themselves.

And it is human nature for individuals to seek guidance - or lack thereof - that provides presumed validation of those decisions made.

Because all we have to barter with is time, life is far too short to be miserable...and every day that goes by miserable here represents the opportunity cost of lost seniority elsewhere.

All we have is our time...how are you choosing to spend yours?

BK came to ups straight out of the military. He was reportedly, to some degree, anti-union in his first few years. He had an incident early on that almost cost him his job. Only upgraded within the last couple of years so has been a career FO for most of his time. In his 20+ years here, no union work, never attempted to run for office.

His posts aren’t particularly well thought out, often don’t hold up to basic logic tests, and just aren’t indicative of someone with a quality education. It’s brash loudmouth opinion instead of, ‘lone voice of intelligent clarity/sanity.’ Further, his perspectives on how things work are in stark contrast to 90+% of people who have served in the union in any upper level capacities. You know, the people who actually know what they’re talking about on the subject.

Cheer for him at your own demise. But you have to be a sheep yourself to do so - anyone with rational thought process can see through him and his camp from a mile away.

The reality that somebody actually came up with and presented the idea of opening a door with an engine running shows there is no safety first culture here - most safety conscious people would see that as a line being crossed. Using cheap safety straps, not remediating when called out on it, then cutting the tags off to hide that info shows they are reckless.

Not grounding the MD: FedEx and WAG followed suit so they are industry standard there.

Schedules and the optimizer: they’re gunna push until they see where our line is. That line is drawn by FAT calls. Flying tired is one thing but dozing off is too tired so that’s under FAT’s umbrella. Fatigue itself is different - you don’t necessarily need to be tired to be fatigued. It’s far better to call FAT if in any doubt or concern vs waiting until you know you are fatigued (which is well past the threshold anyway). We are way too conservative in calling FAT.

Document, document, document! There is only a problem when a documented trend is established. A paper trail leads to liability which effects change. This is true for fatiguing schedules, safety concerns, or straight out harassment. Have filed a report today?

You need to be pretty mindless to follow a crazy person like BK. Even his occasional valid points are completely overshadowed by his stupidity.

Just curious, are you a signal group member all worked up by your echo chamber calling everyone else sheep?

I don’t think it’s mindlessness as much as its simple attraction to rhetoric. Most of these guys don’t have a real or “from experience,” understanding of how things work with UPS so they think rewriting the rules is: 1. Possible, 2. will bring changes they seek. I wish they were right - but life is never that simple nor easy…