Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
apcooper said:Which airlines does NJ have jumpseat agreements with?
Grizz said:Lear -
The question wasn't about "jumping." He asked about formal jumpseat agreements. How many does FLOPS have?
Any 135 pilot can walk down a terminal and try and beg a ride. It's not the same as having an agreement.
Grizz said:Lear -
The question wasn't about "jumping." He asked about formal jumpseat agreements. How many does FLOPS have?
Any 135 pilot can walk down a terminal and try and beg a ride. It's not the same as having an agreement.
apcooper said:Which airlines does NJ have jumpseat agreements with?
Grizz said:How many does FLOPS have?
Wow, can you post a copy of it here for us to read?minimums said:FLOPS has an "official" agreement with AirTran. We had an "official" agreement with Southwest until some smart azz putz ruined it for everyone pre-911.
We also have a formal agreement with TransMeridian.CE750Driver said:There is one formal agreement with Commuteair. It was announced about a year and a half ago if I remember correctly.
apcooper said:...if I flew for NJ, myself or my immediate family couldn't fly standby for free on any of the major airlines. Is this correct?
realityman said:A letter from our chief pilot formalizing a jumpseat agreement would have been more a ceremonial thing than anything, and would have given our pilots a tremendous amount of flexibility, and possibly eliminated (or reduced) one of the more contentious issues in our current contract negotiations (that of gateway airports).
Netjets continues to make things hard for themselves in order to spite the pilots.
realityman said:FL450,
You pretty much just made my point again, in that there is no logical reason NJA couldn't, or shouldn't, endorse jumpseating.
However, jumpseating and gateways aren't entirely separate issues. Okay, let me rephrase that. They WEREN'T entirely separate issues. Back when I was on the jumpseat committee, one of the reasons we were trying for jumpseats was to make life easier for our commuting pilots (back when everyone had to report to CMH). We were having a hard time attracting pilots back then, and a major reason was that everyone had to come to CMH for duty. That wasn't a very attractive prospect for a pilot living on the west coast when we had no jumpseat agreements. However, Netjets rejected the jumpseat idea, and shortly thereafter the gateways were born. In reality, the gateways are a much better deal for everyone, as jumpseating isn't always the most reliable way to travel. So that part worked out better for everyone. However, I believe that had we gotten the jumpseat agreements in place, gateways would at least be a smaller issue than it is today. At the very least, NJA would be able to argue against expanding the current gateway system because we would've had travel privledges on the airlines. Yes, I think it would be a less contentious issue today if we had jumpseating.
BUT, we do NOT have jumpseating, and so it goes. As of this moment in time, you are correct in that jumpseating and gateways are two completely separate issues.