The Negatives of the new Netjets proposal

[SDCFI]

Seat Locks

Seat locks may suck, but at least you can bid over to other a/c. At Flex you're stuck with what you get. Would be nice for a 45 or 60 FO to be able to bid over to the 300 or 604, but no. Not a big deal with upgrades under two years, but if they go back up to 4+ that's a long time to be stuck in the right seat of a Lear.

 

[Flybet3]

Ok NJA folks, we keep hearing from our CP at Flexjet that we only talk about the good things from this new proposal and that its not fair to only talk about the good things. For our benefit, what are the bad things in this new deal so we may discuss?

Pilots... Never fu**** happy. NOT EVER! :smash:

 

[gunfyter]

It may take until 2010 for the efficiency of a 5 domicile system to be apparent, but if this TA gets voted down, I would not be surprised if we stuck with 5 until 2010.

.

Domiciles work so well ... thats why NJI has them....

 

[RNObased]

I read this very argument over and over on here, and it always boggles my mind that you are surprised by it. With the 5 domiciles, NJ is profitable and still attracting qualified applicants. There is no need for the Company to voluntarily open additional domiciles when it can/is be used as a bargaining chip. Do you seriously think the IBT would give up it's "loop holes" like captain bypass and H-day placement out of the kindness of it's heart? It may take until 2010 for the efficiency of a 5 domicile system to be apparent, but if this TA gets voted down, I would not be surprised if we stuck with 5 until 2010.

If the TA fails, the Company will continue to make it's millions without having to pay the pilots more. Maybe then us Company folk would get a share of that profit. We'll take your signing bonus and give the money we save from your increased salaries to Berkshire!

It sucks that 86%(or whatever the number was) were happy with the current CBA, but the new one only needs 50.1% to pass. Seems like there will be more unhappy workers with the new TA than there was/is with the current CBA.

If you think this IBB is just to open up more gateways and give the pilots a raise, then you haven't been shown the big picture.

Don't worry we will find "loop holes" in this contract if it passes, that is what we do.

I'm not even going to talk to you about money, you probably had the chance to become a pilot if you wished.

The pilots will do their jobs even if this passes, by one vote. Just because a guy is voting no, doesn't mean he is against everything in the contract and most of us are professional enough to move past it.

 

[Nolife]

The new TA sounds great. I'd go to NJA now if they called just for the chance of working under those rules and money.

As far as long term planning everyone in this business should know by now that the only constant is change. Live for today and see what happens tomorrow. Stressing over what may happen in 2013 and using that as a reason to vote down this TA in crazy in my opinion.

 

[rumrnr78]

Doyle- What are you smoking? NJA will set the pace and Flex will be 5 steps behind- always. I enjoyed my time at Flex but looking forward if anyone has less than 5/6 years time I'd say apply to NJA.
I worked 5 on 3 off (PBS) with 8 year Captains on the same schedule, not something I looked forward too! Great experience but thankfully I am gone-
Cheers-rum

 

[Guitar Guy]

...It may take until 2010 for the efficiency of a 5 domicile system to be apparent, but if this TA gets voted down, I would not be surprised if we stuck with 5 until 2010...

Why is 2010 a magic year? I'm based out of one of the dumb-a-ciles and most of my partners during 2007 have been from the same one and I can count on one hand the amount of times we've flown a plane out of there on day one. I can't recall the last time we brought a plane back to the dumb-a-cile on the last day of a tour. And that's with both of us on the same 7/7 schedule.

 

[notaNJApilot]

2010 is the expiration of the 2005 CBA (I think).
I personally think that the 5 domiciles would work if we had more pilots and more planes (NJI is too small for it to work). Less than 25% of the current pilots are domiciled...I think if more were, then we'd see more use out of the concept. <disclaimer: I am only speculating> Obviously these things would require major changes, but anything is possible.
more pilots would mean a greater chance of being paired with someone from your domicile. more planes (and owners) means greater chance of starting/ending a tour at your domicile.
maybe some of the training/checking could come to you instead of you going to it. we'd cut out some of the money spent airlining you around...and the entire day wasted. if you didn't airline to CMH for company recurrent, you'd have 2 extra duty days. maybe check airman could hang out at your domicile and occupy your time instead of twiddling your thumbs. it would save you from airlining to the CA or the CA airlining to you.

i have no idea what went through the negotiator's head, but i highly doubt domiciles were designed just to piss people off. not like the CBA wasn't voted on anyway...

 

[captain dad]

The way I see it the negatives do not outweigh the positives.

I believe it will pass by a large margin. (Representative of the polling numbers.)

Life will continue to be good and the airline guys will continue to think we are all suckers. So win win.:laugh:

 

[CA1900]

2010 is the expiration of the 2005 CBA (I think).
I personally think that the 5 domiciles would work if we had more pilots and more planes (NJI is too small for it to work). Less than 25% of the current pilots are domiciled...I think if more were, then we'd see more use out of the concept.

I really don't think that's the case. To start a tour out of a domicile, you'd need both crewmembers and an airplane (of the right make and model for the crew) all on the same start day, all at the same base.

I'm in our biggest fleet, based out of PBI, and have never picked up an airplane in PBI. Not once. If the plane were there, and the whole crew were there, it might make sense. But that just doesn't happen with any regularity. Indeed, forcing people to fly out of these cities with expensive air service (PBI, DFW, LAX) is costing the company, not saving it.

Need examples of the insanity? I spent half of my first day recently getting to a plane at the MCO Cessna Service Center! (It's a few miles from where I live.) I started my day in PBI at 9am, got a rental car to FLL, to take a Mesa flight that got me to MCO at 405pm. Another half hour to get my bag and get to the service center, another hour or so getting the plane cleaned up and preflighted, and it's 6pm -- 10 hours after report time to get a plane ready that was parked a mere few miles from my apartment. The plane was signed off the evening prior, and was ready to fly revenue, had I not wasted the whole day getting to my MCO-based captain.

In another example, I ended a tour at SFO a while back, because that's where the plane ended up going. I spent the entire duty day getting home, with a connection in Newark. Had I been based in MCO, the company could have used me for a leg or two, and still been able to get me home, because MCO has dramatically more frequent (and less expensive) air service than PBI, many times with direct flights from many cities.

That time I spent making a connection in EWR could have been productive for the company, but it wasn't, because I'm based in PBI instead of MCO. Instead, the whole day was shot getting me home on a $900 ticket to PBI with a 3-hour EWR layover, instead of a $403 nonstop on United.

i have no idea what went through the negotiator's head, but i highly doubt domiciles were designed just to piss people off.

The claim at the time, as I understand it, was that planes were going to be ferried back to these bases, and routine maintenance would be done overnight. That absolutely did not happen, for the same reasons we don't pick the planes up from domiciles at all: the planes aren't there. They're out on the road, flying owners around. When they need maintenance, they're fixed at the nearest service center or company facility. It isn't an airline. The planes don't go through these cities like airline hubs.

It was a bargaining chip to use down the road; nothing more.

not like the CBA wasn't voted on anyway...

Well, it wasn't voted on by those who would be subject of the full brunt of the domicile system. I don't at all begrudge them for doing what they needed to do at the time, but those of us really affected by the domiciles weren't employees yet. So the suggestion that it's a good policy "because it was voted on" is a non-sequitur.