Spirit of NKS
07-29-2010, 07:51 PM
#1671
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,577
I hate to be a pessimist, but we got four aircraft, and virtually no recalls so far this year.
In the road show powerpoint presentation, I believe the number of crew that the company wanted to get to with increased efficiencies was 6.47 per seat/per aircraft. So we are looking at a total of about 13 crew per aircraft, if the company utilizes efficiencies as they hope.
13 x 32 aircraft (by Sept 2010) = 416 (below current numbers already on property)
13 x 34 aircraft (by Feb 2011) = 442 (below current numbers already on property)
13 x 35 aircraft (by early 2011) = 455 (the current number on property)
13 x 37 aircraft (by the end of 2011) = 481
We still have 509 on the seniority list. That still leaves almost 30 on the furlough list at the end of 2011.
I am not trying to ruin anyone's day...but I am tired of the false hope. Do I think they are going to utilize all these efficiencies? No....But I also think management will try to get as close to that 13 (crew per aircraft) number as possible, as quickly as possible.
I am still on that furlough list. When that call comes..it comes. I am tired of getting wrapped up in the hype.
In the road show powerpoint presentation, I believe the number of crew that the company wanted to get to with increased efficiencies was 6.47 per seat/per aircraft. So we are looking at a total of about 13 crew per aircraft, if the company utilizes efficiencies as they hope.
13 x 32 aircraft (by Sept 2010) = 416 (below current numbers already on property)
13 x 34 aircraft (by Feb 2011) = 442 (below current numbers already on property)
13 x 35 aircraft (by early 2011) = 455 (the current number on property)
13 x 37 aircraft (by the end of 2011) = 481
We still have 509 on the seniority list. That still leaves almost 30 on the furlough list at the end of 2011.
I am not trying to ruin anyone's day...but I am tired of the false hope. Do I think they are going to utilize all these efficiencies? No....But I also think management will try to get as close to that 13 (crew per aircraft) number as possible, as quickly as possible.
I am still on that furlough list. When that call comes..it comes. I am tired of getting wrapped up in the hype.
After the passage of 90 hour block, RED/GREEN (no float for you) and that SLICK new reserve system that sells our reserve brothers into slavery; I'd say your MEC put the wood to you furloughed guys pretty good.
Mark this post, get back to me later.
PS DON'T FORGET THE "C' CHECKS! GOOD DAY SIR
07-30-2010, 05:11 AM
#1672
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: A320 CA
Posts: 944
I hate to be a pessimist, but we got four aircraft, and virtually no recalls so far this year.
In the road show powerpoint presentation, I believe the number of crew that the company wanted to get to with increased efficiencies was 6.47 per seat/per aircraft. So we are looking at a total of about 13 crew per aircraft, if the company utilizes efficiencies as they hope.
13 x 32 aircraft (by Sept 2010) = 416 (below current numbers already on property)
13 x 34 aircraft (by Feb 2011) = 442 (below current numbers already on property)
13 x 35 aircraft (by early 2011) = 455 (the current number on property)
13 x 37 aircraft (by the end of 2011) = 481
We still have 509 on the seniority list. That still leaves almost 30 on the furlough list at the end of 2011.
I am not trying to ruin anyone's day...but I am tired of the false hope. Do I think they are going to utilize all these efficiencies? No....But I also think management will try to get as close to that 13 (crew per aircraft) number as possible, as quickly as possible.
I am still on that furlough list. When that call comes..it comes. I am tired of getting wrapped up in the hype.
In the road show powerpoint presentation, I believe the number of crew that the company wanted to get to with increased efficiencies was 6.47 per seat/per aircraft. So we are looking at a total of about 13 crew per aircraft, if the company utilizes efficiencies as they hope.
13 x 32 aircraft (by Sept 2010) = 416 (below current numbers already on property)
13 x 34 aircraft (by Feb 2011) = 442 (below current numbers already on property)
13 x 35 aircraft (by early 2011) = 455 (the current number on property)
13 x 37 aircraft (by the end of 2011) = 481
We still have 509 on the seniority list. That still leaves almost 30 on the furlough list at the end of 2011.
I am not trying to ruin anyone's day...but I am tired of the false hope. Do I think they are going to utilize all these efficiencies? No....But I also think management will try to get as close to that 13 (crew per aircraft) number as possible, as quickly as possible.
I am still on that furlough list. When that call comes..it comes. I am tired of getting wrapped up in the hype.
Another MAJOR unknown is what affect the lack of 150% for OT will have on the number of trips picked up. If this backfires on the company it could negate all the efficiencies in the new CBA. Time will tell I guess.
Good luck! I hope to see you on line soon....I think I will.
07-30-2010, 08:41 AM
#1673
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: A320 CA
Posts: 163
I will never fly OT for 100%. If we hang tough 150 will come back as it did before. All depends on how many OT crack addicts can calm their addiction long enough to force the company to bring it back.
07-30-2010, 09:12 AM
#1674
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 758
As far as I know, they intend to use any staffing shortages as leverage for hiring/upgrading, NOT for bringing back premium pay for OT.
I won't believe that premium pay for OT will return until I see the official resolution to do so pass in both Local 18 and 109.
07-30-2010, 09:22 AM
#1675
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,857
Do you have a reference to a MEC position stating that they intend to bring back 150% OT? It is my understanding that the union is deadset against any premium payed OT, if so I find it highly unlikely that 150%OT will come back.
As far as I know, they intend to use any staffing shortages as leverage for hiring/upgrading, NOT for bringing back premium pay for OT.
I won't believe that premium pay for OT will return until I see the official resolution to do so pass in both Local 18 and 109.
As far as I know, they intend to use any staffing shortages as leverage for hiring/upgrading, NOT for bringing back premium pay for OT.
I won't believe that premium pay for OT will return until I see the official resolution to do so pass in both Local 18 and 109.
And as for how many will suck out to OT, my guess 15-20 % of our pilots, one in particular who on his own words "DOESN'T GIVE A ==== ABOUT FURLOUGHS".
(eventually EVERYONE has to answer to a higher authority, best of luck to him)
Cheers.
07-30-2010, 07:03 PM
#1676
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,577
WRONG! more like 100%, it's the law. 90 hour lines require FORCED OVERTIME during the busy season. Company friendly reserve lets them stretch us out a little thinner before rehiring.
So next time you go on an OT bashing spree, look in the mirror, 74% of you voted to keep pilots on the street.
07-31-2010, 05:21 AM
#1677
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: A320 CA
Posts: 549
WRONG! more like 100%, it's the law. 90 hour lines require FORCED OVERTIME during the busy season. Company friendly reserve lets them stretch us out a little thinner before rehiring.
So next time you go on an OT bashing spree, look in the mirror, 74% of you voted to keep pilots on the street.
So next time you go on an OT bashing spree, look in the mirror, 74% of you voted to keep pilots on the street.
You've had some good input on this thread, so don't trash your own credibility. Soon you'll start to sound like those few on the Spiritboard that can't say anything without the statement "what Herb would've done...but you all voted him out". I and many others lost our own logins to that site because we got tired of hearing the same thing over and over from the same people.
Why don't you try debating about the contract without telling us all how horrible we are? A healthy debate is good for all, but trashing everyone (except yourself, the All-Powerful No Vote) is just going to get you ignored.
07-31-2010, 06:40 AM
#1678
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,857
OT, very touchy! last time I check OT'rs were well above 90 a month. But I wont argue with you about something of the past.
I am sincerely sorry if it makes a difference on your way of life. As a long time FO i've learn to live reality and not CA America fantasy life, therefore OT isn't a big deal for ME (I'm sure I am not alone).
I wish we all made lots of money, but for pilots it wouldn't be enough.
Like I said before, 76% of US think we CAN live with this new contract for the next 5 yrs. Thats majority, like it or not. It would be productive to think how we can improve this new and improve contract when time comes. Think positive and enjoy life. (maybe your avatar is making you angry)
Cheers.
I am sincerely sorry if it makes a difference on your way of life. As a long time FO i've learn to live reality and not CA America fantasy life, therefore OT isn't a big deal for ME (I'm sure I am not alone).
I wish we all made lots of money, but for pilots it wouldn't be enough.
Like I said before, 76% of US think we CAN live with this new contract for the next 5 yrs. Thats majority, like it or not. It would be productive to think how we can improve this new and improve contract when time comes. Think positive and enjoy life. (maybe your avatar is making you angry)
Cheers.
07-31-2010, 06:47 AM
#1679
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,577
Ramrod, seriously...give it a rest. It's over. The votes were counted and it passed. Like it or not, it's our work agreement for at least 5 years. Don't be that guy that runs around making an ass of yourself just so everyone knows you voted no.
You've had some good input on this thread, so don't trash your own credibility. Soon you'll start to sound like those few on the Spiritboard that can't say anything without the statement "what Herb would've done...but you all voted him out". I and many others lost our own logins to that site because we got tired of hearing the same thing over and over from the same people.
Why don't you try debating about the contract without telling us all how horrible we are? A healthy debate is good for all, but trashing everyone (except yourself, the All-Powerful No Vote) is just going to get you ignored.
You've had some good input on this thread, so don't trash your own credibility. Soon you'll start to sound like those few on the Spiritboard that can't say anything without the statement "what Herb would've done...but you all voted him out". I and many others lost our own logins to that site because we got tired of hearing the same thing over and over from the same people.
Why don't you try debating about the contract without telling us all how horrible we are? A healthy debate is good for all, but trashing everyone (except yourself, the All-Powerful No Vote) is just going to get you ignored.
We are all concerned about the furloughed guys, I'm just saying, some seem to be focused on ostracizing a few OT clowns, while much greater damage is being done. This CBA WILL keep pilots on the street longer, that is a FACT. The effeciencies in this CBA are will documented on this board, and outweigh, many times over, any amount of OT pickup. It just seems silly to pat yourself on the back for plugging a small leak with your finger, while the whole dam is coming down around you.
As for Herb, I made my anti-herbinista position clear in one of these NK threads.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
