Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
02-14-2015, 08:18 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2013
Position: Utah Chapter
Posts: 391
02-14-2015, 08:49 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 131
After a reroute today, I lost my 30 hr layover that I needed to make my next trip work. Instead, I have a 9:01 layover tomorrow night, with a DH the next day. If I take a later DH, I don't get my 30 Hrs. So my question is, can they give me a 9:01 layover? What is the minimum, since it is an east coast trip that will most certainly get delayed?
Little help? Thanks!
02-14-2015, 08:57 PM
looking for underboob
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: NYC 7ER LCA
Posts: 902
02-14-2015, 11:37 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,599
So it's at risk compensation! We agree on something!
02-15-2015, 03:56 AM
Works Every Weekend
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 737 ATL
Posts: 3,506
After a reroute today, I lost my 30 hr layover that I needed to make my next trip work. Instead, I have a 9:01 layover tomorrow night, with a DH the next day. If I take a later DH, I don't get my 30 Hrs. So my question is, can they give me a 9:01 layover? What is the minimum, since it is an east coast trip that will most certainly get delayed?
The answer is yes they can give you a 9:01 layover if it meets the rest requirements for all the surrounding flight duty periods and the contractual break in duty requirements. Keep in mind that deadhead only periods are not flight duty periods but deadhead segments occurring at the beginning or middle of the period are part of the FDP. When they are at the end of the FDP then they are not.
You do realize that if a reroute causes your next trip to "not work" because of 117 rest issues, then you are pay protected. That would normally be considered a good deal. Let them take your 30 hour break.
You might have recovery obligations though. It depends. We would need a lot more detail to give you the answer you are looking for I think.
02-15-2015, 04:04 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 131
Need more information to answer your question. Its a bit convoluted.
The answer is yes they can give you a 9:01 layover if it meets the rest requirements for all the surrounding flight duty periods and the contractual break in duty requirements. Keep in mind that deadhead only periods are not flight duty periods but deadhead segments occurring at the beginning or middle of the period are part of the FDP. When they are at the end of the FDP then they are not.
You do realize that if a reroute causes your next trip to "not work" because of 117 rest issues, then you are pay protected. That would normally be considered a good deal. Let them take your 30 hour break.
You might have recovery obligations though. It depends. We would need a lot more detail to give you the answer you are looking for I think.
The answer is yes they can give you a 9:01 layover if it meets the rest requirements for all the surrounding flight duty periods and the contractual break in duty requirements. Keep in mind that deadhead only periods are not flight duty periods but deadhead segments occurring at the beginning or middle of the period are part of the FDP. When they are at the end of the FDP then they are not.
You do realize that if a reroute causes your next trip to "not work" because of 117 rest issues, then you are pay protected. That would normally be considered a good deal. Let them take your 30 hour break.
You might have recovery obligations though. It depends. We would need a lot more detail to give you the answer you are looking for I think.
02-15-2015, 05:19 AM
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 767 F/O
Posts: 90
I agree. If you needed the 30 hours rest in 168 hours to be legal to fly the 2nd trip, and they take your 30 hours away you can't fly the 2nd trip as scheduled. You will be pay protected. They may break up the 2nd trip into a segment you can fly. I think they can put you on a DH on the last leg that puts you over 168 hours.
Last edited by S3toHerk; 02-15-2015 at 05:58 AM.
02-15-2015, 05:58 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Posts: 272
02-15-2015, 06:09 AM
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
Here's where you and DALPA are so disingenuous: Yes, profit sharing is "at risk" compensation, but so is every other word of our PWA. Our hourly rates are "at risk" compensation. Our JV scope production balances are "at risk" job protections. Our furlough protections are "at risk" job protections. Our hearts continuing to beat is an "at risk" activity.
Singling out profit sharing and describing it as the exclusive "at risk" portion of our contract is being done for the specific purpose of lowering its value in the minds of pilots. If you and DALPA are successful at doing so, it will be easier for the MEC administration to call it a victory when they use a reduction in our profit sharing to fund hourly rate increases. Key to this strategy is the tactic of a constant drumbeat of devaluing profit sharing. Once again, here is how I answered your question of what we should call profit sharing in front if the NMB:
It's a powerful status quo item that gives us tremendous leverage...if we were represented by a labor union.
Carl
Singling out profit sharing and describing it as the exclusive "at risk" portion of our contract is being done for the specific purpose of lowering its value in the minds of pilots. If you and DALPA are successful at doing so, it will be easier for the MEC administration to call it a victory when they use a reduction in our profit sharing to fund hourly rate increases. Key to this strategy is the tactic of a constant drumbeat of devaluing profit sharing. Once again, here is how I answered your question of what we should call profit sharing in front if the NMB:
Carl
02-15-2015, 07:09 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2013
Position: Entitled rocket surgeon!
Posts: 193
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
