Any "Latest & Greatest about Delta?" Part 2
10-15-2024, 03:14 PM
#6431
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,657
One issue i see with this…….when you are trying to get somewhere and that day goes into the crapper, wouldn’t this system destroy our ability to be flexible? If i dont make a flight, and want to try an alternate route, it would be pretty crappy to not get on because a new hire checked in before you on your backup plan. Id rather just keep it senority based in this hypothetical situation that will never actually arise
Listing <24 hours DOH S3B
10-15-2024, 03:32 PM
#6432
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: DAL FO
Posts: 2,185
beats having 20 people list inside an hour prior and blow your chances of making a flight. With TOC everyone lists 24 hours out and makes things far more predictable.
the difference in pilot seniority between a June 2021 hire and a June 2024 hire (3 years) is about the same as between a June 2021 hire and a June 2001 hire (20 years). Someone hired this year can look forward to decades of getting beat out by tens of thousands of employees and their families all hired within 3 years of them.
the difference in pilot seniority between a June 2021 hire and a June 2024 hire (3 years) is about the same as between a June 2021 hire and a June 2001 hire (20 years). Someone hired this year can look forward to decades of getting beat out by tens of thousands of employees and their families all hired within 3 years of them.
Sorry not sorry about bumping someone hired a week after I was. Just the same as I don’t gnash my teeth when the one hired a week before aces me out.
Seniority matters.
10-15-2024, 03:43 PM
#6433
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2015
Position: UNA
Posts: 4,674
One issue i see with this…….when you are trying to get somewhere and that day goes into the crapper, wouldn’t this system destroy our ability to be flexible? If i dont make a flight, and want to try an alternate route, it would be pretty crappy to not get on because a new hire checked in before you on your backup plan. Id rather just keep it senority based in this hypothetical situation that will never actually arise
and if it was set up like AA, you could change your existing reservation to an alternate route to the same destination and keep your original check in time.
10-15-2024, 03:51 PM
#6434
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2015
Position: UNA
Posts: 4,674
it’s a moo point anyway as I put the likelihood of this changing about the same as us placing an order for 100 787s and basing them in BOS, MCO, and DFW.
10-15-2024, 04:26 PM
#6435
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: DAL FO
Posts: 2,185
clearly I’m not changing your mind, and that’s fine. I think the rational for why seniority matters in non revving loses some of its merit when observed through the lens of 40% of an employee group being hired in 36 months. Someone hired today will likely not have good non rev seniority for a while, could be decades if the people we have hired decide they like working here. Thats could amount to the entire career of an average age new hire.
it’s a moo point anyway as I put the likelihood of this changing about the same as us placing an order for 100 787s and basing them in BOS, MCO, and DFW.
it’s a moo point anyway as I put the likelihood of this changing about the same as us placing an order for 100 787s and basing them in BOS, MCO, and DFW.
I just don’t see any reason to upend “the way we’ve always done it” because suddenly there’s a lot of newhires with tightly bunched hire dates. That same phenomenon you’re describing for non revving will also affect their AE horsepower, vacation bidding, etc. In a word: seniority.
The flip side of what some seem not to like is that 2001 hire you referenced. Just when they’re starting to have some real horsepower, others that don’t want to wait their turn, would like to change the rules. In case it’s not clear, I respectfully don’t want to have anything to do with an AA style system.
10-15-2024, 05:04 PM
#6436
Bus driver
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 839
Agreed it’s not likely to change. And I do appreciate the different perspective you’re bringing up.
I just don’t see any reason to upend “the way we’ve always done it” because suddenly there’s a lot of newhires with tightly bunched hire dates. That same phenomenon you’re describing for non revving will also affect their AE horsepower, vacation bidding, etc. In a word: seniority.
The flip side of what some seem not to like is that 2001 hire you referenced. Just when they’re starting to have some real horsepower, others that don’t want to wait their turn, would like to change the rules. In case it’s not clear, I respectfully don’t want to have anything to do with an AA style system.
I just don’t see any reason to upend “the way we’ve always done it” because suddenly there’s a lot of newhires with tightly bunched hire dates. That same phenomenon you’re describing for non revving will also affect their AE horsepower, vacation bidding, etc. In a word: seniority.
The flip side of what some seem not to like is that 2001 hire you referenced. Just when they’re starting to have some real horsepower, others that don’t want to wait their turn, would like to change the rules. In case it’s not clear, I respectfully don’t want to have anything to do with an AA style system.
10-15-2024, 05:32 PM
#6437
Bent over by buybacks
Joined APC: Feb 2017
Posts: 820
10-15-2024, 08:44 PM
#6440
Moderator
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,908
Agreed it’s not likely to change. And I do appreciate the different perspective you’re bringing up.
I just don’t see any reason to upend “the way we’ve always done it” because suddenly there’s a lot of newhires with tightly bunched hire dates. That same phenomenon you’re describing for non revving will also affect their AE horsepower, vacation bidding, etc. In a word: seniority.
The flip side of what some seem not to like is that 2001 hire you referenced. Just when they’re starting to have some real horsepower, others that don’t want to wait their turn, would like to change the rules. In case it’s not clear, I respectfully don’t want to have anything to do with an AA style system.
I just don’t see any reason to upend “the way we’ve always done it” because suddenly there’s a lot of newhires with tightly bunched hire dates. That same phenomenon you’re describing for non revving will also affect their AE horsepower, vacation bidding, etc. In a word: seniority.
The flip side of what some seem not to like is that 2001 hire you referenced. Just when they’re starting to have some real horsepower, others that don’t want to wait their turn, would like to change the rules. In case it’s not clear, I respectfully don’t want to have anything to do with an AA style system.
Not arguing either way, just that the comparison to pilot-only seniority items isn’t a great one.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
