Viper446

Anyone notice in the HKG 76 bid back for Nov that the 76 is flying ICN-ANC and ANC-ICN? Yep, over 7.35hrs, an RFO and no sleep facility on the 76. And the company is going to talk with the union about a sleep facility on the 76, right? How long before the 76 starts flying MEM-CDG and then intra Europe flying? At least on the 11 we can lie like dogs on a futon.

CloudSailor

I'm sure the company will further discuss this, in our favor, once the TA is ratified. Just like some LEC's believe they will with Section 28. Right...

This is my view of negotiations in regards to the sleep pod and 36 hr layovers in the 767:
NC: we want a sleep facility in the 767, so we can rest properly
FX: well, it's not required until block over 12
NC: ok, we want 36 hour layovers after augmented flights without a rest facility
FX: standby while we look into that
--FX negotiators run it by airline planning. Airline planning says "yeah we will have them operate the 767 to EUR, then bounce the crews around on the 757 for the week, like UPS, before they operate back. The 36 hour layovers post-augmented flights, are already planned into those upcoming pairings - we will never need the sleep pods, just like UPS".
FX: well, we looked into it, and those 36 hour layovers will be tough and expensive for us to do, but we will consider them if you give us 8 in 24 relief.
NC: awesome, sounds like a deal.

FDXLAG

So we agree this has nothing to do with the TA right? If it passes there are restrictions on scheduling the 76 on block over 8. If it fails then the current rules that apply to the Bus and MD are fair game, whether that aircraft has a sleep facility or not right?

PeterGriffin

We are not comparing TA to current book. We are looking at our presents and comparing them to what was on our Christmas list, not the old toys in our toy box...(which, admittedly, will be the ones we will have to keep playing with)

The NC, however, is comparing TA to current book...thus, the positive spin.