Herkflyr

There was a quote I heard a few years ago and it was very good: "This weeks 'crisis' is next week's barely remembered footnote."

My guess is that you are the only guy on the seniority list losing sleep over this. Didn't get 8 hours of good sleep? So what. Call the company and inform them of your new pickup and departure time.

Also, I recently flew a trip that had an absolute minimum 10 hour layover--it was very civilized. We had a quick trip to the airport hotel (yes I realize that is not always the case), had 30 minutes to grab a beer, and I still got a good night's sleep and had ample time to calmly get ready for the morning pickup.

My guess is that the number of times that you will only get 8 hours behind the door and the company insists that you must have only 8 hours--and that that is a problem that the FAA will concern themselves with--is going to be extremely remote.

I do agree that the "8 hours behind the door" text should be removed from the contract. Just like we don't have a hard "2 hour call out" for short call and have left the contractual language deliberately non-specific, we should probably do the same with "opportunity for 8 hours sleep."

sailingfun

Go to Delta net. Then go to the IFS section and select the 31 Jan rumor has it. They have a complete accounting for the profit sharing. In summary the profit for the calculation was 3.4 billion. That produced 430 million in the pool. Profit sharing is pensionable and has some other cost impacts. That brings the total cost to the company up to 506 million. It's all in Delta net.

Alan Shore

Being on reserve about as much as on a regular line, I have experienced zero QOL loss. I am full earlier than I used to be under the previous PWA, and I am hardly ever used. FWIW, I did not hear it said at the roadshows that this would only be used in int'l categories. Rather, it was the long trips in the int'l categories that motivated the Company to ask for this.

We were told at the roadshows that the PWA did not allow the harassment. When the harassment began, DALPA told us that it was not allowed and that they were taking steps to stop it. I have not heard of any misapplication of the good-faith basis since around August of last year, have you?

One additional short call in return for a 5-10 hour increase in the reserve guarantee sounds like a pretty good deal to me. On top of that, we have additional days off when the guarantee is less than 75.

Massive giveback? Really?

The "minor improvements," when offset by productivity concession and profit sharing "punt," still add up to us earning 20% more in 2015 than we did in 2013.

Miserable, shortsighted failure? Really?

DAL 88 Driver

Okay. That's all well and good. But what if a flightcrew member listens to our scheduling committee chairman or a certain SLC Captain rep and thinks that exactly "8 hours behind the door" satisfies this requirement? What if that flightcrew member is, heaven forbid, then involved in some kind of incident or accident the next morning? When the FAA investigates and discovers that the flight crew only had 8 hours behind the door, that flight crew is going to most likely get violated and hung out to dry.

So, while I agree with you that the ALPA FAR 117 guide is a good reference... given the bad information that is being put out by some within DALPA, I don't think it's quite enough. In other words, I think further clarification (regarding the fact that 8 hours behind the door cannot possibly fulfill the FAR requirement for an 8 hour uninterrupted sleep opportunity) is needed before someone gets himself in trouble. Don't forget that there are pilots who rely on the information DALPA puts out. That includes emails from committee chairman, reps, etc.

scambo1

Now if we could get that on the ULH, instead of extrapolating the BS Jo-berg carveout to every 4 man, we'd really have something.

DAL 88 Driver

GMAB. I'm not losing any sleep over it. You just don't like the fact that DALPA has egg on their face over some of your golden children putting out bad information.

It's a legitimate concern/issue. As I've previously acknowledged numerous times, it should be a very rare issue due to the 10 hour minimum rest requirement. But it can happen. I've already bumped up against once. Fortunately, in my case the crew tracker was knowledgeable on the FAR (specifically the 8 hour uninterrupted sleep opportunity), and getting the pickup time changed to an appropriate time for the next morning was a non-issue.

But if DALPA is successful at redefining this to mean the same as our contractual "8 hours behind the door" then the next time I run into this I might also run into resistance from a crew tracker with a new "understanding." And then the CPO might want to know why I delayed the flight when I could have had exactly "8 hours behind the door" and picked up at the hotel in time to get the flight out on time. That's one of the things I'm trying to prevent. If you think it's not relevant or important, then you can bury your head back in the sand and all will be fine. Maybe.

GunshipGuy

My impression is that the time the company is concerned most about is the one they believe the FAA is more concerned about. And to me that seems to be the requirement that you have 10:30 between block in and your show at the airport. As far as block out I don't think they are concerned with that, other than in the sense the company would like you to depart closer to your originally scheduled time than not as long as you had 10:30 between block in and airport show.

sailingfun

You forgot one other critical item. Reserve full calculations now include known absences. It's now looking like this is having a more positive impact then ALV15 has as a negative.
The same guys still crying about this assured us the job loss was massive and we were going to have a large furlough last fall and hiring was years away.

tsquare

Good grief. You just want to bash dALPA. Have fun. It's boring. You have been offered a solution... a couple in fact. The same solution has been shown to you in writing. You have been asked to suggest a contractual solution. (which you decline) It seems that you cannot be satisfied until someone at dALPA tells you what to do, and then if it doesn;t fit your paradigm, you will probably go on with the bash fest. I... just... don't... get it.

DAL 88 Driver

No... you... don't... get it.

None of what you wrote above is true. None.

I've explained it as clearly as it can be explained. You're hopeless. I'm not wasting any more time on you.