17-07v
03-24-2017, 02:27 PM
#101
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: 320 Captain
Posts: 666
Ask a JetBlue ALPA member if they support codeshare with Emirates .. they'll either be truthful and say yes, or lie and say no. They WANT the ME codeshares since they lack the international feed. Therein lies the problem with lobbying this issue. Ask Boeing Union members if they want NAI .. more 787's, more jobs, no brainer. Ask Delta if they want ATC modernization for better slot management in the Northeast. They don't care about that so much .. it'd help United more than them and they don't want that.
This is the problem with pseudo-deregulation. Everyone still has to rely on their man in Washington to get an advantage. That's great until someone else presents a better bargain to the man in Washington. What can you do at that point, complain that your competitors' payoffs were larger than yours?
This is the problem with pseudo-deregulation. Everyone still has to rely on their man in Washington to get an advantage. That's great until someone else presents a better bargain to the man in Washington. What can you do at that point, complain that your competitors' payoffs were larger than yours?
And it happens within a specific airlines pilot groups as well, especially when it's contract time. "I want pay...I want work rules....the contract prevents me from earning more....the contract saves my job.....". See the mini ****storm that just happened on the widebodies, when the SSC determined they no longer had to grant a contractual waiver in order to build PBS lines. Pilots complaining that ALPA was forcing a 10+% paycut because instead of 90 hours, they could only be awarded a max of 80 per the contract. We are our own enemy.
Herding cats is easier then getting pilots to agree on something, let alone pilots at competing carriers.
03-24-2017, 06:31 PM
#102
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Posts: 1,871
Agree. At the end of the day we are united as pilots until it affects our individual airlines either positively or negatively.
And it happens within a specific airlines pilot groups as well, especially when it's contract time. "I want pay...I want work rules....the contract prevents me from earning more....the contract saves my job.....". See the mini ****storm that just happened on the widebodies, when the SSC determined they no longer had to grant a contractual waiver in order to build PBS lines. Pilots complaining that ALPA was forcing a 10+% paycut because instead of 90 hours, they could only be awarded a max of 80 per the contract. We are our own enemy.
Herding cats is easier then getting pilots to agree on something, let alone pilots at competing carriers.
And it happens within a specific airlines pilot groups as well, especially when it's contract time. "I want pay...I want work rules....the contract prevents me from earning more....the contract saves my job.....". See the mini ****storm that just happened on the widebodies, when the SSC determined they no longer had to grant a contractual waiver in order to build PBS lines. Pilots complaining that ALPA was forcing a 10+% paycut because instead of 90 hours, they could only be awarded a max of 80 per the contract. We are our own enemy.
Herding cats is easier then getting pilots to agree on something, let alone pilots at competing carriers.
03-30-2017, 05:38 PM
#105
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: 320 Captain
Posts: 666
I can accept your observation on days worked as one of the outcomes from the lack of a waiver, for some pilots. However, the fact still remains that the waiver was no longer needed and the contractual parameters are being followed. Does that mean it's a change for some? No doubt, but having the company adhere to the contract is the desired goal right?
If anything it shows how forked up the company has been in its fleet and marketing planning for these past 5 years.
03-31-2017, 12:53 PM
#106
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Posts: 1,871
Did you see the thread on the other forum (not the scab one) titled something like "forced to take a paycut!"?
I can accept your observation on days worked as one of the outcomes from the lack of a waiver, for some pilots. However, the fact still remains that the waiver was no longer needed and the contractual parameters are being followed. Does that mean it's a change for some? No doubt, but having the company adhere to the contract is the desired goal right?
If anything it shows how forked up the company has been in its fleet and marketing planning for these past 5 years.
I can accept your observation on days worked as one of the outcomes from the lack of a waiver, for some pilots. However, the fact still remains that the waiver was no longer needed and the contractual parameters are being followed. Does that mean it's a change for some? No doubt, but having the company adhere to the contract is the desired goal right?
If anything it shows how forked up the company has been in its fleet and marketing planning for these past 5 years.
The EWR 777 base has always been a special animal due to the amount of ultra-long haul trips. The company has been trying for a long time to somehow reduce the amount of guys going to the sim for landings, it looks like they finally accomplished it by throwing in just enough domestic flying to dilute the solution and push flying trips farther down the list.
03-31-2017, 04:16 PM
#107
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: 320 Captain
Posts: 666
Would you not classify working more days for less pay as a "pay cut?"
The EWR 777 base has always been a special animal due to the amount of ultra-long haul trips. The company has been trying for a long time to somehow reduce the amount of guys going to the sim for landings, it looks like they finally accomplished it by throwing in just enough domestic flying to dilute the solution and push flying trips farther down the list.
The EWR 777 base has always been a special animal due to the amount of ultra-long haul trips. The company has been trying for a long time to somehow reduce the amount of guys going to the sim for landings, it looks like they finally accomplished it by throwing in just enough domestic flying to dilute the solution and push flying trips farther down the list.
For CAL maybe EWR 777 was special but the pilots in SFO/LAX/ORD/IAD are well familiar with ultra long haul flights. And have been in some cases for decades.
I'm sure the company converted the non Hawaiian three class A models to the Hawaiian configuration just to lessen the amount of landings classes that EWR f/o's were going to.
04-01-2017, 09:03 PM
#108
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Posts: 1,871
Paychecks go up and down. All a pilot is guaranteed though is 73/75 hours and 12 days off. Those that were able to get a 90 hours PBS build should be thankful that they were able to due to the waiver. But flying changes, both the actual routes or trip mixes. Welcome to what other fleets/bases have been experiencing for a while. Since when is following the contract a bad thing?
For CAL maybe EWR 777 was special but the pilots in SFO/LAX/ORD/IAD are well familiar with ultra long haul flights. And have been in some cases for decades.
I'm sure the company converted the non Hawaiian three class A models to the Hawaiian configuration just to lessen the amount of landings classes that EWR f/o's were going to.
For CAL maybe EWR 777 was special but the pilots in SFO/LAX/ORD/IAD are well familiar with ultra long haul flights. And have been in some cases for decades.
I'm sure the company converted the non Hawaiian three class A models to the Hawaiian configuration just to lessen the amount of landings classes that EWR f/o's were going to.
04-02-2017, 12:34 PM
#109
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: 320 Captain
Posts: 666
Forever the only "short" flight the 777 did out of EWR was LHR and occasionally FRA or BRU. The next shortest trip was TLV at 22:25. After that NRT was 27:00, PVG 29:00, DEL 29:00, BOM and HKG at 31:00. Obviously the solution to make lines was severely limited, which resulted in a steady stream of landings classes year round. I never said anything about converting "A" models, although flying three class airplanes to Hawaii nowadays makes no sense, but I know for a fact the company has been actively looking to reduce landings classes in order to free up sim time. You obviously disagree but it's odd that there was "just enough" domestic flying added to change the solution.
Forever the only "short" flight the 777 did out of EWR was LHR and occasionally FRA or BRU. The next shortest trip was TLV at 22:25. After that NRT was 27:00, PVG 29:00, DEL 29:00, BOM and HKG at 31:00. Obviously the solution to make lines was severely limited, which resulted in a steady stream of landings classes year round. I never said anything about converting "A" models, although flying three class airplanes to Hawaii nowadays makes no sense, but I know for a fact the company has been actively looking to reduce landings classes in order to free up sim time. You obviously disagree but it's odd that there was "just enough" domestic flying added to change the solution.
Not disagreeing that EWR 777 has a lot of ultra long haul flying. So did SFO 747 at one point, and currently SFO 787. EWR 777 is and was not unique in trying to make trips fit into the monthly schedule.
Anyways. In the grand scheme of things, we have no control how or why the company builds the flying. On any fleet.
04-06-2017, 07:37 PM
#110
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
