Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Awful quiet

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
News at eleven.
 
I personally think anyone hired after the '05 contract was unneeded. We never took the deliveries they anticipated and ended up overstaffed. Throw in the economy plunging down the crapper and this is the mess we have. I don't think we'll ever see recalls or at least the numbers we would like to see. Also you have to consider that the clowns running this show now are trying to do more with less. Every time I down a plane for a hard write-up, I'm on an airline to another. They're testing the waters. Just the way I see. I hope I'm wrong.

I think you're a bit off here... Around '05 contract, what did NJA have? Maybe 2100 pilots.. I got hired mid-'07 and there were atleast 480 a/c.... You're theory suggests that 2100 pilots could have manned 480+ a/c.. Thats nearly a 4.4 pilot/aircraft staffing ratio.. Way too little, and BTW well below the contractual staffing minimum.....I was also here for the winter 2007 busy season (the one where NJA had record flights) No way '05 staffing levels could have supported that much flying...Unless of course you were losing OT, then we were overstaffed:D

In winter 2007/'08, every person on property was most certainly needed. Without a doubt.

I'll agree that those hired in mid-late 2008 may have been uneccessarily hired... They were running classes up until Sept. 2008 or so.
 
Hey BentOver, one thing you have to consider is relaibility. No one mentions that and I failed to in my previous post. What are we running now, 60-70% on a good day? It get's pretty complicated but they are doing more with less and also factor in the decreased flying by the owners. These clowns are going to keep shrinking it and try run with less. I believe one of the reasons they had such a big hard on for scope relief is that they wanted to sell more shares and just keep the airframes parked and use charter (read that EJM) to cover the gap in service. The Ponzi scheme gets bigger!
 
Hey BentOver, one thing you have to consider is relaibility. No one mentions that and I failed to in my previous post. What are we running now, 60-70% on a good day? It get's pretty complicated but they are doing more with less and also factor in the decreased flying by the owners. These clowns are going to keep shrinking it and try run with less. I believe one of the reasons they had such a big hard on for scope relief is that they wanted to sell more shares and just keep the airframes parked and use charter (read that EJM) to cover the gap in service. The Ponzi scheme gets bigger!

True, but that is really really old news from back in March-April, and the notion left the building when Sokol's bald head left. They have since given up on scope relief.

The reliability is always a factor when covering trips. But I fail to see how that correlates to the number of pilots needed to man 480+ airframes over the 2007 year when many of us were hired.

My point is, in 2007 the newhires that came on were needed and the planes were there..... I see no way that the 2007 flying could have been covered with 2005 staffing.....we're talking probably close to 600 pilots of the top of my head.... In 2007 reliability was not a factor in staffing.

The reliablity of a/c can also be "determined" by the pilots who fly them. ahem....those little nuisance lights that we all know how to fix on our own, but suddenly require write ups....ahem...
 
The reliablity of a/c can also be "determined" by the pilots who fly them. ahem....those little nuisance lights that we all know how to fix on our own, but suddenly require write ups....ahem...
Why do pilots do that? or fly at FL290, when flight planned for FL370, not fly LRC?
 
Why do pilots do that? or fly at FL290, when flight planned for FL370, not fly LRC?

Well, I'll try to explain....If an "upper yaw damp" EICAS msg. pops up, there is a 99% chance that by doing the usual circuit breaker reboot, it wil correct itself..When management is being a bunch of dicks it automatically becomes a maintenance function. This a write-up. Simple laws of being dickheads vs. not being dickheads towards the employee group.
 
Well, I'll try to explain....If an "upper yaw damp" EICAS msg. pops up, there is a 99% chance that by doing the usual circuit breaker reboot, it wil correct itself..When management is being a bunch of dicks it automatically becomes a maintenance function. This a write-up. Simple laws of being dickheads vs. not being dickheads towards the employee group.
and pilots are not being dick heads for doing this? Is this a contest to see who can be the biggest dick?
 
and when the battle of d!cks gets intense owners get affected, and then, if it happens often, leave. So who wins that battle ...CA, FO, FLEX.
 
and when the battle of d!cks gets intense owners get affected, and then, if it happens often, leave. So who wins that battle ...CA, FO, FLEX.
Hey stop that! This is FI it does not deal in reality. You are only an owner, what would you know about owning or buying fractional shares? This is FI it deals in how unfair management is to pilots.
 
Last edited:

Latest resources

Back
Top