Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
04-22-2010, 06:49 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: Kickin’ Back
Posts: 6,971
What's getting so bad about it? Less international and more domestic? It seems like when I'm in PBI guys are saying that, NYC guys in particular. They say they are going down to ATL and bouncing around there until the last day when they get up to NYC again.
The reason I don't like the 7ER category is because the reserve rules seem even worse. I'm not very educated on them, but it seems that scheduling can assign 24 hr SC's? Is that correct? And they can do them back to back? How is this justified? Is it because a crew member gets rest on an ocean crossing? What if you're assigned a domestic trip? Then the Whitlow rule and lookback applies? Could you even get a domestic trip off of a 24hr SC?
Holy crap.....my head is spinning...
The reason I don't like the 7ER category is because the reserve rules seem even worse. I'm not very educated on them, but it seems that scheduling can assign 24 hr SC's? Is that correct? And they can do them back to back? How is this justified? Is it because a crew member gets rest on an ocean crossing? What if you're assigned a domestic trip? Then the Whitlow rule and lookback applies? Could you even get a domestic trip off of a 24hr SC?
Holy crap.....my head is spinning...
As far as short call in an international category, yes it is 24 hrs at a time. I believe they can only assign a domestic trip within the first 12 hrs because of whitlow Whitlow does not apply to international ops hence the ability of the company to schedule 24 hr SC (plus it's in the contract).
Denny
04-22-2010, 06:49 AM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
On the International Jets the SC period is 24 hrs. You can be assigned a domestic rules trip as long as it complies with Whitlow. International Flag and Supplemental Operated flights (2,3, and 4 pilot) are not covered under Whitlow and therefore you do not have a maximum period between rest that is required. Remember reserve is not duty, but also not rest.
There are many two many international trips that fall in to this group. It is not because of rest on the rest seat on an 9 hrs flight. It is because currently there are no requirements for rest on these types of operations nor is there and guidance under the Whitlow letter. I have seen many pilots start SC at at 1130 one day and get called out for a six day trip an hr before that SC period ends the next day. It is all legal.
There are many two many international trips that fall in to this group. It is not because of rest on the rest seat on an 9 hrs flight. It is because currently there are no requirements for rest on these types of operations nor is there and guidance under the Whitlow letter. I have seen many pilots start SC at at 1130 one day and get called out for a six day trip an hr before that SC period ends the next day. It is all legal.
04-22-2010, 06:51 AM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Earlier this month I had a 24Hr SC followed by 13 hours off followed by a west coast trip with a redeye coming back. Yeah, it is getting ugly on the ER in NYC. In addition you have to cover 3 airports and the schedulers seem to think it is walking distance between the airports. I used to love it but now I think that ATL base with whatever I can hold might be better.
Wow, that is painful!
It looks like it may become a more junior category.
04-22-2010, 06:51 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: SLC ERB
Posts: 467
The reason I don't like the 7ER category is because the reserve rules seem even worse. I'm not very educated on them, but it seems that scheduling can assign 24 hr SC's? Is that correct? And they can do them back to back? How is this justified? Is it because a crew member gets rest on an ocean crossing? What if you're assigned a domestic trip? Then the Whitlow rule and lookback applies? Could you even get a domestic trip off of a 24hr SC?
04-22-2010, 06:56 AM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
I'm not based in NYC but, with that being said, the ER category in NYC used to be all international trips which made it an easy category to commute to. Even junior line holders could do so fairly easily. Now there are alot of domestic trips with early morning sign ins, late arrivals, or both. Making commuting to either a line or reserve much harder.
As far as short call in an international category, yes it is 24 hrs at a time. I believe they can only assign a domestic trip within the first 12 hrs because of whitlow Whitlow does not apply to international ops hence the ability of the company to schedule 24 hr SC (plus it's in the contract).
Denny
As far as short call in an international category, yes it is 24 hrs at a time. I believe they can only assign a domestic trip within the first 12 hrs because of whitlow Whitlow does not apply to international ops hence the ability of the company to schedule 24 hr SC (plus it's in the contract).
Denny
Now the international trips looked more commuter friendly.....although I really wasn't keen on the whole 72 hr layovers in DKR!
Anyway, living in the Midwest I want nothing to do with a NYC base.
04-22-2010, 07:03 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: Kickin’ Back
Posts: 6,971
I was looking at the bid packet for May. There were a lot of 0600 reports, and some of those trips end around 2400. Definitely not commuter friendly. Reminds me of my days as a EWR CoEx captain.
Now the international trips looked more commuter friendly.....although I really wasn't keen on the whole 72 hr layovers in DKR!
Anyway, living in the Midwest I want nothing to do with a NYC base.
Now the international trips looked more commuter friendly.....although I really wasn't keen on the whole 72 hr layovers in DKR!
Anyway, living in the Midwest I want nothing to do with a NYC base.
I know a few guys that commute to NYC from the Pacific Northwest to do the international trips. That commute is juuuuust a little long for me although I considered it in the past. With the current way trips look and what I could possibly get, I'll stay in LA and hope to be at least the plug in SEA if it's on the next AE!!
Denny
04-22-2010, 07:06 AM
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Here is the actual Whitlow Letter if you care to read seven pages
http://cf.alpa.org/internet/projects.../FTDT11-20.pdf
Here in an interpretation letter or guidance dated 2006
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...est-interp.pdf
http://cf.alpa.org/internet/projects.../FTDT11-20.pdf
Here in an interpretation letter or guidance dated 2006
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...est-interp.pdf
04-22-2010, 07:12 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: Kickin’ Back
Posts: 6,971
Here is the actual Whitlow Letter if you care to read seven pages
http://cf.alpa.org/internet/projects.../FTDT11-20.pdf
Here in an interpretation letter or guidance dated 2006
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...est-interp.pdf
http://cf.alpa.org/internet/projects.../FTDT11-20.pdf
Here in an interpretation letter or guidance dated 2006
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...est-interp.pdf
Denny
04-22-2010, 07:13 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 243
Here is another thought that I have been pondering and I am curious to see what the group thinks: (That is a warning)
I have been thinking about a few things in regard to our DCI flying. These FFD or Cost Plus contracts are a big money loser for DAL. We have a limit of 255 on 70/76 seat jets. DAL wants to modify these contracts.
So;
Lets say DAL management came to D-ALPA with a proposal to allow a certain number of 76 seat jets. That number could be anything up to the 255 allowable number now. I will not pick a specific number, just up to that number. In return they will cap DCI at 300-400 total aircraft. It is a hard number and cuts DCI in half for allowing at a max 102 more 76 seat jets.
What are your thoughts on this. It is a victory to control scope as well as a concession to allow more 76 seat jets. What do you think of it? My gut is telling me that something like this may be the next paper across the table.
I have been thinking about a few things in regard to our DCI flying. These FFD or Cost Plus contracts are a big money loser for DAL. We have a limit of 255 on 70/76 seat jets. DAL wants to modify these contracts.
So;
Lets say DAL management came to D-ALPA with a proposal to allow a certain number of 76 seat jets. That number could be anything up to the 255 allowable number now. I will not pick a specific number, just up to that number. In return they will cap DCI at 300-400 total aircraft. It is a hard number and cuts DCI in half for allowing at a max 102 more 76 seat jets.
What are your thoughts on this. It is a victory to control scope as well as a concession to allow more 76 seat jets. What do you think of it? My gut is telling me that something like this may be the next paper across the table.
There are already 153 CR9 and E175 aircraft in the fleet. This is more than there should be.
I don't think that locking in the a number of 50 seats is that important since, at least for now, they have proven to not be an effective repayment for mainline. Don't get me wrong I would take a hard cap but not sure that that is enough of a "carrot" to bite at.
So that leaves the 70 - 76 seat issue. We already have the hard cap of 255 no need to renegotiate that unless we were able to get it down significantly or get something even better in return.
IMO, if we could get the total down to 200 total 76 seat jets and solid language in place that this will not increase and that Delta pilots would have flow back rights to ALL of these aircraft as well as a minimum pay rate set for this out sourced flying and for pilots who had to flow back into them then it would be an ok deal. I may even be willing to go all the way to 255 permitted aircraft if the protections above were included and a high enough min pay rate was set for all 70+ seat flying.
I don't think that Delta would ever do this however. If major airlines would start setting minimum pay rates for their outsourced flying if would take the pressure off of mainline pay rates to be "competitive." It would also promote less outsourcing since there will be less incentive due to pay rates set by mainline and tied to our contract. It would also stop, to a degree, the endless frenzy and pressure on the pilots at the regional level to be the lowest cost carrier in order to compete for or keep the flying they currently have.
Also, consider that if we grew the 76 seat jets this would mean close to 3 billion spent on the DCI fleet (100 a/c). That money could be better spent on mainline considering the age difference in the fleets.
So to sum up: NO! but with the stipulations I made I would consider it as it would be a win for us long term.
04-22-2010, 07:14 AM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Here is the actual Whitlow Letter if you care to read seven pages
http://cf.alpa.org/internet/projects.../FTDT11-20.pdf
Here in an interpretation letter or guidance dated 2006
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...est-interp.pdf
http://cf.alpa.org/internet/projects.../FTDT11-20.pdf
Here in an interpretation letter or guidance dated 2006
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...est-interp.pdf
I don't need to read it. I've got all you guys to break it down for me.
But thanks for the link.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
