FDX- ANC Disputed Pairing...ughhhh.
08-13-2009, 08:58 AM
#51
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 767 Captain
Posts: 3,989
??? How do you figure?
Reserves get paid anyway and someone was going to fly it and get paid - now they're getting paid 'cuz they're sick. Either way - no change to the "cost to operate the trip". If someone else picked it up, the cost would double. With a reserve flying it due to sick call, cost change is neutral, IMO.
Reserves get paid anyway and someone was going to fly it and get paid - now they're getting paid 'cuz they're sick. Either way - no change to the "cost to operate the trip". If someone else picked it up, the cost would double. With a reserve flying it due to sick call, cost change is neutral, IMO.
08-13-2009, 03:48 PM
#55
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,409
Ok guys, so he was the SFS LEC and now he is on reserve first fly. What is the point you are trying to make? He gets assigned a disputed pairing and by our own CBA he has to fly it.
Last edited by FR8Hauler; 08-13-2009 at 05:13 PM.
08-13-2009, 06:40 PM
#56
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: ANC -11 FO
Posts: 189
If there's a trip there that pays more than 20 hours and at first glance looks like a good trip . . . you can bet it's disputed. Before you try to pick it up check the SIG notes, there's a reason trips like this one sit in open time for so long. Figure it out.
08-13-2009, 07:13 PM
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Position: Mad Dog Capt
Posts: 226
??? How do you figure?
Reserves get paid anyway and someone was going to fly it and get paid - now they're getting paid 'cuz they're sick. Either way - no change to the "cost to operate the trip". If someone else picked it up, the cost would double. With a reserve flying it due to sick call, cost change is neutral, IMO.
Reserves get paid anyway and someone was going to fly it and get paid - now they're getting paid 'cuz they're sick. Either way - no change to the "cost to operate the trip". If someone else picked it up, the cost would double. With a reserve flying it due to sick call, cost change is neutral, IMO.
Pilot #1 calls in sick. Gets paid X hours for trip to stay home.
Pilot #2 gets a RSV call (or OT if time permits). This pilot also gets paid X hours for same trip.
Double the hourly rate for this particular trip. So much for cost savings.
Still no excuse for accepting a DP...not at all...but the costs do tend to escalate when the folks don't fly the DP's.
It does matter.
08-13-2009, 08:23 PM
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: leaning to the left
Posts: 4,184
??? How do you figure?
Reserves get paid anyway and someone was going to fly it and get paid - now they're getting paid 'cuz they're sick. Either way - no change to the "cost to operate the trip". If someone else picked it up, the cost would double. With a reserve flying it due to sick call, cost change is neutral, IMO.
Reserves get paid anyway and someone was going to fly it and get paid - now they're getting paid 'cuz they're sick. Either way - no change to the "cost to operate the trip". If someone else picked it up, the cost would double. With a reserve flying it due to sick call, cost change is neutral, IMO.
08-14-2009, 06:11 AM
#59
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 767 Captain
Posts: 3,989
I see your logic...Reserves don't get paid for a trip, as it is covered with their RLG. But, you're missing an important point. All DP's should be flown by reserves. So, NOBODY should be getting paid for them. In this case, the trip was flown by a reserve AND a guy was paid for it.
I'm not missing anything. I agree with you completely. All I was doing was attempting to refute the "double cost" logic someone presented which seemed to indicate picking up a DP and then sicking out of it was some kind of deterrent to the company.
The only thing that will help w/ DPs is leaving them in open time from the start.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
