FDX - Communications from the NC
#61
Unless the reserve utilization is near 100%...Your argument leaks water.
If the company is paying one guy an extra 72hrs, and another guy to sit on his arse at home, for half of his R-days, for 60...They are wasting their money. Make that "OUR" money.
We've hashed and rehashed whether a loss of carryover hours would be used for new lines(less reserves), or higher BLGs. You figure out which a company would do if they're trying to cut costs. Seems that we've already reduced alot of carryover and I certainly don't see higher BLGs.
If the company is paying one guy an extra 72hrs, and another guy to sit on his arse at home, for half of his R-days, for 60...They are wasting their money. Make that "OUR" money.
We've hashed and rehashed whether a loss of carryover hours would be used for new lines(less reserves), or higher BLGs. You figure out which a company would do if they're trying to cut costs. Seems that we've already reduced alot of carryover and I certainly don't see higher BLGs.
A very effective way to lower BLG is to take hours out of the month's flying by attaching it to the previous month as carryover. We've hashed and rehashed this? Apparently not enough. JG seems to think it affects BLGs. He mentions it in his message line.
100% utilization? That's definitely not the number they are looking for. They need some reserves for those blips due to weather and sick calls. But if the average reservist flies, for example, 40 hrs it looks better when the RLG is lower. 40 hrs flown out of 58 paid is higher utilization than 40 out of 68.
Sorry, can't agree with you.
Last edited by Gunter; 01-28-2009 at 01:39 PM.
#63
#64
The company continues to upgrade folks into the widebody seats, CA and FO. That's why Boeing SOs are continuing to upgrade to FO. Overmanned? Sure. But the company is not acting like it with upgrades. Why are we paying for training and the higher pay rates as a result of these upgrades?
I think it is because they want low BLGs to cut costs. No other cost savings measure is being considered.
It cuts our training pay for recurrent.
It cuts pay for flexes to do "draft" sim support.
It increases reserve utilization without an increase in reserve flying. (Cuts their pay)
It drastically cuts the pay of the bottom 30% in each seat and cuts it below 68/85 for over 50%
Once again the company has a single minded drive in one direction. Forget all other ideas to help the company's bottom line.
Don't even get me started on how we could have kept the 757 line open and received new 757s instead of the worn out ones coming....At a much higher cost than we thought we would pay.
For those of you who think the company has got it all figured out....I advise you to think again.
I think it is because they want low BLGs to cut costs. No other cost savings measure is being considered.
It cuts our training pay for recurrent.
It cuts pay for flexes to do "draft" sim support.
It increases reserve utilization without an increase in reserve flying. (Cuts their pay)
It drastically cuts the pay of the bottom 30% in each seat and cuts it below 68/85 for over 50%
Once again the company has a single minded drive in one direction. Forget all other ideas to help the company's bottom line.
Don't even get me started on how we could have kept the 757 line open and received new 757s instead of the worn out ones coming....At a much higher cost than we thought we would pay.
For those of you who think the company has got it all figured out....I advise you to think again.
#65
The company continues to upgrade folks into the widebody seats, CA and FO. That's why Boeing SOs are continuing to upgrade to FO. Overmanned? Sure. But the company is not acting like it with upgrades. Why are we paying for training and the higher pay rates as a result of these upgrades?
#66
True dat. My buddy just came back from a 9 month LOA. Left as a 727SO and started training this week in the MD-11. He'll be the junior pre-nugget FO (he was the caboose for 4 months until nugget hiring - and was awarded ANC FO the bid prior to nugget hiring) in ANC, at least until the excess!
#70
after the appraisals come on the comps there seems to be a stipulation on being able to sell the house in a certain time frame...90 days for example...then they look at comp homes that sold in that specific timeframe and base the appraisal on that...depending on where u live this could be awful in this market...probably comped with short sales and forclosures...it is not a good deal in this market....if u r going to use the third party program do some research on the stipulations....it is not spelled out in the contract!
Last edited by BOYCAPTAIN; 01-29-2009 at 10:51 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post