Netjets Globals

[CorpCaptain]

No doubt about it. All I care about is keeping the folks in the back happy. If the boss wants a new G550, I'll just consider myself very lucky, and I certainly won't complain. I guess that's my point though. GLEX vs G; who really cares? They're both very capable machines, and each has certain advantages over the other. Sometimes I get the idea you're rooting for the Globals to fail because you love your G. If you are, I believe you may be disappointed. It honestly is a very good airplane.

I'm hopeful that Netjet's large orders with Bombardier will give them enough influence to improve the caliber of Bombardiers customer service and their willingness to stand behind their product. In my opinion, that is still Bombardiers weakness not the airplanes themselves.

Couldnt have said it better myself. Havent seen any type of issues outside the regular CAS messages and CTL-ALT-DEL continual resets. The frame and interior has held up fantastically without issue. Spent the day yesterday with a G-Bird rep expounding on the 650 over golf and simply could not believe the first one avail is nearly 4yrs out. 550? Almost 2 years. They arent hurting. IMHO, you have 6 in one hand, half a dozen in the other.

 

[CA1900]

We thought we were getting relief when she was scheduled to go home on our day 5. And then she extended two days.....

Wait, they're in contract negotiations and they're picking up extended days? Holy hell, way to devalue yourself in the middle of negotiations.

 

[gutshotdraw]

Wait, they're in contract negotiations and they're picking up extended days? Holy hell, way to devalue yourself in the middle of negotiations.

My exact point to her in a nutshell. I told her when you extend at the end of a tour, you are rewarding management incompetence because they either can't staff properly or else abuse people so badly they call in sick. Wait a tic. BOTH of those things are happening.

When they dropped an extra ferry and a 13 pax transcon onto what was an easy day, I was ready to shell her if she said one word about it.

She extended. You pay the piper.

My partner told me later she bitched to him and he shut her down which is why I didn't hear a peep out of her.

 

[CA1900]

My partner told me later she bitched to him and he shut her down which is why I didn't hear a peep out of her.

Tough love. Sometimes it has to be done!

 

[imacdog]

My exact point to her in a nutshell. I told her when you extend at the end of a tour, you are rewarding management incompetence because they either can't staff properly or else abuse people so badly they call in sick. Wait a tic. BOTH of those things are happening.

When they dropped an extra ferry and a 13 pax transcon onto what was an easy day, I was ready to shell her if she said one word about it.

She extended. You pay the piper.

My partner told me later she bitched to him and he shut her down which is why I didn't hear a peep out of her.

Uh huh. And the G pilots account for how many extended days, exactly?

 

[gutshotdraw]

Uh huh. And the G pilots account for how many extended days, exactly?

Some of you might not like to hear this but....

Because of long, complicated international itineraries, GLC crews are sometimes asked if they can go out for a 9 or 10 day tour so as to avoid a REALLY expensive crew swap in some far-flung international locale. That is actually smart business and, in my view, a legitimate use of extended days. Since it is for a known itinerary, Crew Planning will move down the list until they find a crew that can do the trip. Because it happens often and is sometimes multiplied by 3 because of augmented crews, those extended days rack up quickly. Hence the higher numbers of GLC extended days.

What is NOT legitimate is when a Gulfstream is bouncing around the CONUS and scheduling suddenly realizes "holy crap, we're short pilots, (or FA's) will you extend?" THAT is BAD business and mismanagement. For me, that answer is always "thanks, but no, thanks." I will admit, too many of my GLC colleagues actually agree to extend under this scenario.

The Global 6000 fleet is dominated by open bid, double digit seniority numbers but I would be willing to bet the extended day numbers (pro-rated by airframe) are very similar in that fleet.

And before you get all "holier-than-thou" on me, take a closer look at the percentage of former NJI that work the 18 day versus the percentage of 18 day schedules of the NJA crossovers and across the small fleets. The results are telling. I would argue that the high 18 day participation rate has extended the duration of the furlough and has a more negative impact on negotiations than extended days. Can you imagine the chaos if everyone that could bid OFF the 18 day?

 

[Pervis]

Gut, starting with your last, there is a restriction of 10% per bid period for the 18 day schedule reduction. It would take years before we could affect the bottom line. Extending, however, has an immediate impact. As you say, the cost of long distance crew swaps is prohibitive. Being allowed to rely on GLC and Global crews to cover their butts does not help our cause. It's simply business. Applying pressure to your adversary, legally of course, works both ways. The EMT has already started. Why help them in their efforts?

That said, we have not even started negotiations, so hard pressure is not necessary-yet. Be ready though. Remember, by August of 2005, company spent hundreds of millions on vendors. We had an agreement 2 months later. Now, as for the FAs? I mentioned the extended day is not helping their cause at all. She really didn't understand what I was talking about. Please educate them. With both groups involved, together we can improve our QOL significantly.

 

[gutshotdraw]

I agree in principle Pervis. Personally, I have extended MAYBE 10 days in the last 5 years and ONLY for specific, international trips. Extending off the cuff when asked by a panicked scheduler is something I NEVER do and I wish all pilots and flight attendants in ALL fleets reacted the same way. I truly believe there is a difference and a defensible one at that.

As for the 18 day, I am aware that only 10% per bid period can get off the schedule. But if we, as a group, started weaning people OFF the 18 day now, by the time things got down to brass tacks, we would be back to EXACTLY the selloff situation that brought things to a head 8 years ago. Short term financial loss now for long term gain over the life of a contract.

As to educating FA's? If last week's FA is any measure, that will be a tough sell and history repeating itself (AFA vs. Teamsters vote a couple years ago).

 

[Pervis]

Another thought on the 18 day Gut. If everyone did jump off, that would do nothing but make company jump with glee. The money saved and reduction from up to 6 to 4 airlines per month would make them even happier. It might, although I really doubt it, change the staffing requirements. As it is, we could and should bring back all furloughed pilots and we'd still be short staffed. And this is the slow season?

 

[X-rated]

Saw my first N-Reg Netjets 6000 in LFMN yesterday. I've got to say, the Netjets paint scheme looks great on it. Very sharp.

Also, I've got to agree with Gut. Unless your just trying to put your company out of business, you need to realize international flying is unique, and a certain number of extended days are necessary for some long international trips.

Why would punishing the company be a benefit to the furloughed pilots anyway? Those trips have no bearing on whether another crew member is brought off furlough. The airplanes are already properly staffed, it's just far more cost effective and practical to pay a second crew to sit at home while paying the operating crew extended days instead of trying to crew swap on a plane bouncing around Asia. It's economically and operationally unreasonable to crew swap on many of these international trips; that doesn't mean they don't already have enough pilots. Unfortunately, some hardcore types are too myopic to see the big picture.