AMR pilots warn management
#21
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2005
Posts: 89
Back on topic. The argument used to be that the "rules" were put into place for safety reasons, not economic. If the pilots use the leverage of the China routes to get the economic benefits they want, and in turn agree to change the "rules" then so be it, but in doing so they concede the safety argument and will have no business ragging on JetBlue pilots doing the same thing on the transcon turns their company wants.
I think most experts and pilots would agree that longer duty hours are more fatiguing than more flight hours.
Agreeing to change safety rules for economic reasons is a slippery slope of hypocrisy.
Just a thought.
I think most experts and pilots would agree that longer duty hours are more fatiguing than more flight hours.
Agreeing to change safety rules for economic reasons is a slippery slope of hypocrisy.
Just a thought.
#22
Back on topic. The argument used to be that the "rules" were put into place for safety reasons, not economic. If the pilots use the leverage of the China routes to get the economic benefits they want, and in turn agree to change the "rules" then so be it, but in doing so they concede the safety argument and will have no business ragging on JetBlue pilots doing the same thing on the transcon turns their company wants.
I think most experts and pilots would agree that longer duty hours are more fatiguing than more flight hours.
Agreeing to change safety rules for economic reasons is a slippery slope of hypocrisy.
Just a thought.
I think most experts and pilots would agree that longer duty hours are more fatiguing than more flight hours.
Agreeing to change safety rules for economic reasons is a slippery slope of hypocrisy.
Just a thought.
What are you talking about? We currently fly ORD-DEL with 4 pilots. 3 FOs and 1 Captain. We wanted 2 FOs and 2 Captains. We temporarily agreed to DEL. However why in the world should we side letter a Super Long Haul agreement outside of Sec 6.
Unlike YOUR transcon turns this is not a safety issue here. This is a power struggle and an effort to regain what we lost. Why don't you put a relief pilot on your transcon turns?
Lastly with no other airplanes on order, it will be a simple allocation shift, take from this route to fly Bejing. Nothing is gained for the pilot group.
AMR negotiated a concessionary contract with us in a couple months. Before the savings were realized they gained in cash on hand and reported operatig profits. If they NEED Bejing so bad then negotiate in good faith and get a contract done now including super long haul.
Do I want us to fly Bejing, YES, however we have ALL let this profession slide long enough. Time to pull out, even if it means losing some some things along the way.
Regards,
AA
#23
It's about time a pilot spoke in terms of what's good for his profession. The more we stick together and do what's right for the profession, the better we will all benifit as individuals. Pilots need to stop acting in a selfish mannor and start making decisions as a group. When this happens, we will all see the rewards of pay and QOL that was stripped from us.
#24
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2005
Posts: 89
AA,
The duty time limitation that AA wants APA to waive was put there under the pretense of SAFETY.
Whether you personally think a longer duty day is safe enough to accept for contract enhancements really doesn't matter although studies have shown that longer duty days are more fatiguing than more flying in a shorter day.
How many pilots on board doesn't matter either as they all are on the same duty day.
Waiving the restriction for an economic benefit is fine if that is what you want to do but it puts you in the situation of hypocritically condemning others for doing the same thing, as the legacy pilots have done towards the JetBlue pilots who are trying to help themselves and their company out. (No, I don't work for JetBlue.)
It reminds me of the woman in the bar who says she'll sleep with a guy hitting on her for a million dollars, but when he asks if she'll take ten dollars instead she says "what do you think I am?" To which he responds "we already know what you are, we are just negotiating the price."
The legacy pilots have a long history of wrapping themselves in the safety flag over issues that are really economic. Sometimes this comes back to haunt them later.
The duty time limitation that AA wants APA to waive was put there under the pretense of SAFETY.
Whether you personally think a longer duty day is safe enough to accept for contract enhancements really doesn't matter although studies have shown that longer duty days are more fatiguing than more flying in a shorter day.
How many pilots on board doesn't matter either as they all are on the same duty day.
Waiving the restriction for an economic benefit is fine if that is what you want to do but it puts you in the situation of hypocritically condemning others for doing the same thing, as the legacy pilots have done towards the JetBlue pilots who are trying to help themselves and their company out. (No, I don't work for JetBlue.)
It reminds me of the woman in the bar who says she'll sleep with a guy hitting on her for a million dollars, but when he asks if she'll take ten dollars instead she says "what do you think I am?" To which he responds "we already know what you are, we are just negotiating the price."
The legacy pilots have a long history of wrapping themselves in the safety flag over issues that are really economic. Sometimes this comes back to haunt them later.
#27
AA,
The duty time limitation that AA wants APA to waive was put there under the pretense of SAFETY.
Whether you personally think a longer duty day is safe enough to accept for contract enhancements really doesn't matter although studies have shown that longer duty days are more fatiguing than more flying in a shorter day.
How many pilots on board doesn't matter either as they all are on the same duty day.
Waiving the restriction for an economic benefit is fine if that is what you want to do but it puts you in the situation of hypocritically condemning others for doing the same thing, as the legacy pilots have done towards the JetBlue pilots who are trying to help themselves and their company out. (No, I don't work for JetBlue.)
It reminds me of the woman in the bar who says she'll sleep with a guy hitting on her for a million dollars, but when he asks if she'll take ten dollars instead she says "what do you think I am?" To which he responds "we already know what you are, we are just negotiating the price."
The legacy pilots have a long history of wrapping themselves in the safety flag over issues that are really economic. Sometimes this comes back to haunt them later.
The duty time limitation that AA wants APA to waive was put there under the pretense of SAFETY.
Whether you personally think a longer duty day is safe enough to accept for contract enhancements really doesn't matter although studies have shown that longer duty days are more fatiguing than more flying in a shorter day.
How many pilots on board doesn't matter either as they all are on the same duty day.
Waiving the restriction for an economic benefit is fine if that is what you want to do but it puts you in the situation of hypocritically condemning others for doing the same thing, as the legacy pilots have done towards the JetBlue pilots who are trying to help themselves and their company out. (No, I don't work for JetBlue.)
It reminds me of the woman in the bar who says she'll sleep with a guy hitting on her for a million dollars, but when he asks if she'll take ten dollars instead she says "what do you think I am?" To which he responds "we already know what you are, we are just negotiating the price."
The legacy pilots have a long history of wrapping themselves in the safety flag over issues that are really economic. Sometimes this comes back to haunt them later.
Oh ya, liars and cheats as well.
AAflyer
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post