Fleet Discussion and News
11-30-2016, 01:58 PM
#64
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,808
I lost track, what verse of the same old "if labor weren't so expensive, we could buy new jets..." song are we on?
11-30-2016, 01:59 PM
#65
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
It appears the long term planning committee recently held their latest bi-weekly meeting.
11-30-2016, 02:00 PM
#66
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: CRJ FO
Posts: 655
Kirby supposedly loves the 321. The 321neo is outselling the 737max, which means later available delivery slots. The threat of a huge ($$$) cancellation, of both A350 and max10, may compel Airbus to give us a better package of A350's and 321neos with a better delivery schedule.
11-30-2016, 02:12 PM
#67
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2015
Position: B777 CA
Posts: 760
Maybe it's a negotiating tactic to get the 321neo, along with the 350.
Kirby supposedly loves the 321. The 321neo is outselling the 737max, which means later available delivery slots. The threat of a huge ($$$) cancellation, of both A350 and max10, may compel Airbus to give us a better package of A350's and 321neos with a better delivery schedule.
Kirby supposedly loves the 321. The 321neo is outselling the 737max, which means later available delivery slots. The threat of a huge ($$$) cancellation, of both A350 and max10, may compel Airbus to give us a better package of A350's and 321neos with a better delivery schedule.
Even the company counterparts to ALPA's crew rest committee agrees A350 is non compliant per contract and 117.
11-30-2016, 03:23 PM
#68
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2015
Posts: 859
Good points. Also A350 failed ALPA's crew rest committee and it's not compliant with the contract. According to the rep I spoke to our language is strong and ALPA can prevent company from using on augmented flights. Rep said AA & DAL's language no where as strong as ours and they both will apply to FAA for waiver with their union's approval.
Even the company counterparts to ALPA's crew rest committee agrees A350 is non compliant per contract and 117.
Even the company counterparts to ALPA's crew rest committee agrees A350 is non compliant per contract and 117.
11-30-2016, 05:01 PM
#69
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2015
Position: B777 CA
Posts: 760
Where did you find this info? I can't find anything online. I spoke with someone who claimed secure flight deck access to both the overhead crew rest area and a dedicated pilot restroom. There WAS a sublevel crew rest area in initial development I could find. Interesting info if you have any more. (Remembering some of our 777s have no crew rest area !!!)
11-30-2016, 05:30 PM
#70
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Was told what I posted above by a MEC Rep a month or so ago. He stated it was from a crew rest committee MEC briefing in open session a few MEC meetings ago. (Crock I think is the committee official name). I believe he said it was due to the bunk size and overal lack of appropriate space in the crew bunk rest area. Unfortunately that's all the info I have.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
