Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > Delta
Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta? >

Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Search

Notices

Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-28-2015, 09:45 AM
  #181531  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,184
Default

Interesting read.
BenderRodriguez is offline  
Old 04-28-2015, 10:03 AM
  #181532  
seeing the large hubs...
 
iaflyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: 73N A
Posts: 3,748
Default

Trans States and Skywest both have the MRJ set for deliveries in the next 24 months. Our scope clause prohibits these aircraft outside of mainline. This article says that negotiations are underway right now. Funny, but I've not heard anything about it from our CBA...
Originally Posted by scambo1
There was nothing in my contract survey about those.

If section 1 ever came back in the TA with those permitted, what possible reason would I have to even consider blaming ALPA?
"We relaxed scope on the MRJ since no one said they were against it."

Sound familiar? CDOs anyone?

That's a big gripe I have with ALPA - they don't have to give me the specifics, but when a LOA or something is being discussed, how hard would it be to shoot out an email saying, "The following topics are being discussed with the company:

CDO
110+ seat scope
Crew meals
etc...

If you have an opinion on these topics, one way or another, please contact your reps.."

That way they would get some input. The only reason the CDO thing wasn't passed is the pilots found out - Those dastardly pilots!
iaflyer is offline  
Old 04-28-2015, 10:08 AM
  #181533  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,599
Default

Originally Posted by iaflyer
"We relaxed scope on the MRJ since no one said they were against it."

Sound familiar? CDOs anyone?

That's a big gripe I have with ALPA - they don't have to give me the specifics, but when a LOA or something is being discussed, how hard would it be to shoot out an email saying, "The following topics are being discussed with the company:

CDO
110+ seat scope
Crew meals
etc...

If you have an opinion on these topics, one way or another, please contact your reps.."

That way they would get some input. The only reason the CDO thing wasn't passed is the pilots found out - Those dastardly pilots!
The whole CDO thing came up however because a significant number of pilots were lobbying their reps to allow them. They flew them at a prior airline and wanted them back.
sailingfun is offline  
Old 04-28-2015, 10:40 AM
  #181534  
Runs with scissors
 
Timbo's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Going to hell in a bucket, but enjoying the ride .
Posts: 7,730
Default

Originally Posted by Hrkdrivr
FTB and Timbo, I'm supposed to cut the grass today!!!
That grass will still be there tomorrow!

(That's what I tell my wife).

Now... what you could do is...cut the grass with that Highlander.

Two birds, one stone!
Timbo is offline  
Old 04-28-2015, 10:58 AM
  #181535  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,184
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
The whole CDO thing came up however because a significant number of pilots were lobbying their reps to allow them. They flew them at a prior airline and wanted them back.
Define significant. I have yet to meet anyone that wanted those god awful things. Besides, a change that would affect QOL to THAT degree needed to go to the membership. I agree with the flamers here. The way this was broached was completely unacceptable.

I HATE all nighters and I am too old to do those CDOs and be anything resembling safe. And contrary to popular belief, more money doesn't make all things safer.
BenderRodriguez is offline  
Old 04-28-2015, 11:05 AM
  #181536  
Gets Weekends Off
 
CheapTrick's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2012
Position: A350
Posts: 629
Default

Originally Posted by BenderRodriguez
Define significant. I have yet to meet anyone that wanted those god awful things. Besides, a change that would affect QOL to THAT degree needed to go to the membership. I agree with the flamers here. The way this was broached was completely unacceptable.

I HATE all nighters and I am too old to do those CDOs and be anything resembling safe. And contrary to popular belief, more money doesn't make all things safer.
I will agree with Purple when he is correct (which is seldom), but....... Bender sure sounds exactly like that guy from Knoxville with the cheerleader pics.
CheapTrick is offline  
Old 04-28-2015, 11:17 AM
  #181537  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Default

I don't like to speculate on anyone's identity, since this is an anonymous board, but I wouldn't bet against you or PD on this.
Sink r8 is offline  
Old 04-28-2015, 11:21 AM
  #181538  
Looking for a laugh
 
Justdoinmyjob's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,099
Default

Originally Posted by Timbo
I usually have to get up and pee at about 3:45.
You might wanna go see a doctor if you have to go that frequently!
Justdoinmyjob is offline  
Old 04-28-2015, 11:40 AM
  #181539  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,599
Default

Originally Posted by BenderRodriguez
Define significant. I have yet to meet anyone that wanted those god awful things. Besides, a change that would affect QOL to THAT degree needed to go to the membership. I agree with the flamers here. The way this was broached was completely unacceptable.

I HATE all nighters and I am too old to do those CDOs and be anything resembling safe. And contrary to popular belief, more money doesn't make all things safer.
I hate the idea also but several on even here posted they liked flying them. One base passed a LEC resolution to bring them back. I realize it takes only a handful of pilots to do that but the squeaky will gets the grease. I hate domestic all nighters also and they seem worse from a safety standpoint then a CDO.
sailingfun is offline  
Old 04-28-2015, 12:04 PM
  #181540  
seeing the large hubs...
 
iaflyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: 73N A
Posts: 3,748
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
The whole CDO thing came up however because a significant number of pilots were lobbying their reps to allow them. They flew them at a prior airline and wanted them back.
If so, then why when a large cry went up the MEC backtracked and had them removed at the last minute? You would think that if there were lots of pilots asking for it, the MEC would of said that. They didn't, if I remember correctly.

The council 20 reps (which I believe is what LEC resolution you are referring to) said this. I don't see anything along the lines of, "lots of pilots were asking for them"

"After significant debate, the negotiators were tasked to meet with the company to discuss proposed modifications to the tentative agreement, including the removal of Split Duty Periods (SDP).

Incidentally, contrary to a new “urban legend”, the SDPs were not a result of Council 20 reps lobbying for them. We have had significant reservations regarding the concept of Split Duty Periods (SDPs / Continuous Duty Overnights - CDOs), and this was reinforced by the input from Council 20 pilots.


Modifications were made to the tentative agreement (in record time!), removing Split Duty Periods entirely, along with changes to the long call 'leash', and the Company and Negotiators agreed to this new, amended TA."
iaflyer is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
On Autopilot
Regional
22594
11-05-2021 07:03 AM
AeroCrewSolut
Delta
153
08-14-2018 12:18 PM
Bill Lumberg
Major
71
06-13-2012 08:36 AM
Quagmire
Major
253
04-16-2011 06:19 AM
JiffyLube
Major
12
03-07-2008 04:27 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices