Dakota

It's not amazing; it's absurd. That is beyond ridiculous! Calling this guy is not going to do any good -- he needs something stronger.

Beaver

I agree. The more I think about this guy, the more I get steamed. 153+ hrs in a month when others are getting 74 hrs. is just criminal. And doing it by picking up a DP. Who knows this guy? That will be an interesting flight when an excessed Purple Nugget gets assigned to fly with him off reserve.

SuperMario

onetime has this right. Hard parameters are the only way to get this fixed. It's pretty easy - either a pairing meets contract and FAA parameters, or it doesn't even exist. The taboo of DPs is lost on this crew force (sadly, mostly lost on the left seaters) and always will be. I never have and never will (voluntarily) fly a DP, but one soldier can not win the war.

FDXLAG

Great, now awaiting your explanation on how we will get such parameters in the next contract. Because if DPs lose their stigma; FAA parameters and contract parameters will be one and the same.

SuperMario

Answer = NEGOTIATION. If the FAA parameters become our contract parameters then we have only ourselves (and Negotiating Committee) to blame. This problem is far from insurmountable, it only requires the appropriate negotiating capital.

PattyMcGroin

As I said in my earlier post. Lets get this right in the upcoming contract. I am in no way advocating picking up disputed pairings. The current system started out with good intentions but does not work unfortunately.

FDXLAG

So what is it that people are doing that you don't like? Personally I have never pointed out a DP flyer, but I certainly don't object when someone else does. Do you think it is morally wrong to point out someone who habitually flys DPs? You guys don't fly DPs, why not? It is either acceptable or it is not.

So will it be easier or harder to negotiate away three legs in a critical duty period if we routinely fly them before contract negotiations? How much "negotiating capital" you willing to give up. Can it be used better elsewhere?

onetime

Lag, are you one of our negotiators or been involved with contract negotiations in the past? You continue to harp on what hard parameters are going to cost us. When negotiating, everything costs something. Even keeping things the same.

Bottom line is that the DP system is broke. The current process gives every pilot a choice, not to fly DPs recommended by the SIG or fly them. When every segement of society is given a choice, some choose the right and some choose the left. It's no secret what choice some of our guys are making. And for the third time, even if we do it right, i.e. not fly a DP for 3 mo's, the Flt Ops VP and override the process anyway with no greive option. However, if it's in B/W in the contract as a hard parameter it is more difficult for PC to overide. If it's important to us, we will make happen. Just thoughts.

Gunter

If you want scheduling to be a priority in Contract negotiations I recommend SS for MEC Chair. He is former SIG.

Otherwise Grid penalties, international and A380 rates (Just in case we get them in the future) will be the focus. HKG and 757 "costs" will also continue to be minimized.

The choice clear to me.

FDXLAG

No I am not a negotiator, but common sense says it costs more to negotiate something new that will cost the company additional money to give up. Do you not see that? How about we negotiate 1 free stock share for every block hour. Think Fred will say good idea?

Why don't you submit a resolution that says:

Whereas, The DP system is broke and the SIG is wasting their time;
Whereas, It hurts my feelings when someone points out DP flyers;
Whereas, The company has reduced flying thus making DPs harder to resist;
Whereas, We can magically fix it in the next contract;
Therefore, The SIG should no longer identify onerous pairings and allow the company to turn the optimizer up to full reem. This will allow them to further reduce flying and make current DPs much more attractive.