LEC rep who voted for MEMRAT might vote NO
#41
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Welcome almost aboard!
#42
Banned
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: 7th green
Posts: 4,378
Just observing and commenting on what an NC/MEC relationship should be. Apparently your MEC didn't have the balls to make the NC adhere to their direction and opted to put the onus on the rank and file through MEMRAT.
That's another indication of spinelessness...now if it passes they can blame the rank and file if it turns out to be a stinker when the Company implements it. And knowing the general psyche of pilots, it will pass by 55%.
That's another indication of spinelessness...now if it passes they can blame the rank and file if it turns out to be a stinker when the Company implements it. And knowing the general psyche of pilots, it will pass by 55%.
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Just observing and commenting on what an NC/MEC relationship should be. Apparently your MEC didn't have the balls to make the NC adhere to their direction and opted to put the onus on the rank and file through MEMRAT.
That's another indication of spinelessness...now if it passes they can blame the rank and file if it turns out to be a stinker when the Company implements it. And knowing the general psyche of pilots, it will pass by 55%.
That's another indication of spinelessness...now if it passes they can blame the rank and file if it turns out to be a stinker when the Company implements it. And knowing the general psyche of pilots, it will pass by 55%.
#44
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2013
Posts: 133
Just observing and commenting on what an NC/MEC relationship should be. Apparently your MEC didn't have the balls to make the NC adhere to their direction and opted to put the onus on the rank and file through MEMRAT.
That's another indication of spinelessness...now if it passes they can blame the rank and file if it turns out to be a stinker when the Company implements it. And knowing the general psyche of pilots, it will pass by 55%.
That's another indication of spinelessness...now if it passes they can blame the rank and file if it turns out to be a stinker when the Company implements it. And knowing the general psyche of pilots, it will pass by 55%.
#45
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
I do think you're right, however, and there will be pandemonium after the vote, no matter which way it goes. While this happens, we're not going to have a consensus. There will be enormous pressure on the new people to deliver, and no clear way for them to do it, as we go into political purgatory, and management continues to play defense. Because they can, and because we'll make it that much easier for them.
#46
Banned
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: 7th green
Posts: 4,378
Sorry if the truth hurts.
#47
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
#48
Thanks, notenuf.
I'll quote from another thread, below, to explain how I got to the numbers. Since that time, I've heard that there are a bunch of restrictions that make the number smaller. For example, you can't use it to train across bases. It's based on block hours, not trips. Credit time decreases that number. I'm told UAL should have an easier time than Delta to maximize their 75% of OE trips, since they pull the trips before any bidding occurs (no FO's can bid the trips at all), and still they can only get about 35-40% of the "benefit".
As for your point that the numbers will increase with more retirements, my thinking is that the average % across the entire airline could do that, but I can't see us doing much more training in the NB than 100+/month. Purely a guess on my part, but I imagine as more people move up into WB due to attrition, they get to see changes too, offset by the WB growth.
So the philosophical issue is whether it's OK to take something from the FO's that's not being taken from Captains. One argument is that the TA puts serious funds in the pocket of 190 drivers, and adds 190's. Sure, the contract currently has 190 rates, but take a close look at them, and you'll see why the greatest gain in compensation in this TA, ahead of a 777 Captain, is an E190 guy, who has total compensation increases, W/O factoring PS, of $181K over the length of the contract.
It gets better. The total potential efficiencies available under 23.G.5 are 112 jobs, assuming that they get the full impact (not likely), and that there are no trips available for the people whose trip is dropped (not likely at all). The total number of E190's on order is 20, but in order to reach their 76-seat numbers, it needs to be 50. At 7 crews per plane, that's 140-350 additional captain jobs.
Maybe 23.G.5 can't be looked at in a vacuum, but as a shift of incentives for FO's. The net seems to favor FO's, surprisingly. How surprising is that, for a philosophical point?
I'll quote from another thread, below, to explain how I got to the numbers. Since that time, I've heard that there are a bunch of restrictions that make the number smaller. For example, you can't use it to train across bases. It's based on block hours, not trips. Credit time decreases that number. I'm told UAL should have an easier time than Delta to maximize their 75% of OE trips, since they pull the trips before any bidding occurs (no FO's can bid the trips at all), and still they can only get about 35-40% of the "benefit".
As for your point that the numbers will increase with more retirements, my thinking is that the average % across the entire airline could do that, but I can't see us doing much more training in the NB than 100+/month. Purely a guess on my part, but I imagine as more people move up into WB due to attrition, they get to see changes too, offset by the WB growth.
So the philosophical issue is whether it's OK to take something from the FO's that's not being taken from Captains. One argument is that the TA puts serious funds in the pocket of 190 drivers, and adds 190's. Sure, the contract currently has 190 rates, but take a close look at them, and you'll see why the greatest gain in compensation in this TA, ahead of a 777 Captain, is an E190 guy, who has total compensation increases, W/O factoring PS, of $181K over the length of the contract.
It gets better. The total potential efficiencies available under 23.G.5 are 112 jobs, assuming that they get the full impact (not likely), and that there are no trips available for the people whose trip is dropped (not likely at all). The total number of E190's on order is 20, but in order to reach their 76-seat numbers, it needs to be 50. At 7 crews per plane, that's 140-350 additional captain jobs.
Maybe 23.G.5 can't be looked at in a vacuum, but as a shift of incentives for FO's. The net seems to favor FO's, surprisingly. How surprising is that, for a philosophical point?
The fleet could end up being 50+ e190s and 25 e175s if they can't get scope relief. They are looking at the 5+ year plan, the 3 year plan is set and being executed well. I doubt you will remember then but you heard it here first.
Delta Requests to Start Flying Between Orlando and Brazil
ANALYSIS: Delta Adds the Embraer E190 to its Fleet
Second, the language uses block hours. If an LCA has a trip with credit time you need another trip for the block hours needed. 1 new hire in a narrow body needs 40hrs = 2 4day trips. 1 captain needs 25 hours = 1 5day. For each new hire there is an equivalent captain upgrade. How many are coming to the line each month on the 88/90? If they pull the sweet trip I wanted and could hold then I'm out of luck, next. Multiply that for 75% of the list. The further down the worse it gets.
As for 23.G.5. this is exactly what they are avoiding by not assigning 75% of the time. I don't follow you on the benefit. 112 less pilots is less pilots. Selling jobs means we work harder/more. I see the productivity benefit for the company and the pay loss for FOs but not much else.
The real problem comes with 23.W. (reserves required) it is a mess with strikeouts and not worth posting. The changes will make it more difficult to amend your schedule via swaps and drops. Most in base people do, if it gets them the days off they wanted and then whiteslip or greenslip to pick up time if they need it. But if you were sick that month sorry no slips for you. Then there's the whole out of base thing.(not getting into it here)
Here's my reference for trips pulled:
23.D.7. Initial Captain lines will be awarded before initial First Officer lines.
The Company will designate rotations that have been awarded to Line Check Pilots that contain the projected OE/TOE block hours for the pilots expected to complete simulator training in the bid period. Following the award of rotations to First Officers that contain at least 25% of the projected OE/TOE block hours for the pilots expected to complete simulator training in the bid period, the Company may withhold from awarding to First Officers the remainder of such designated rotations. The projection of OE/TOE block hours for the pilots expected to complete simulator training in the bid period will be calculated as follows:
a. 15 block hours for each transitioning narrowbody Captain or First Officer.
b. 25 block hours for each first time narrowbody Captain
c. 40 block hours for each new hire in a narrowbody category
d. 50 block hours for each transitioning First Officer from a narrowbody category to a widebody category
e. 60 block hours for each first time Captain transitioning from a narrowbody category to a widebody category
f. 75 block hours for each new hire in widebody category
Its a good things we are pilots, we couldn't run an airline, we are too reactionary.
Last edited by notEnuf; 06-25-2015 at 08:48 AM.
#50
Fair. I was supposed to have the boat in the water by now anyway. Enjoy.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post