The Negatives of the new Netjets proposal

[notaNJApilot]

Thanks for all the info.
I would think that ferrying the plane back to a domicile for mx / crew swap is just as costly as an airline, maybe more, I don't know. I'm just trying to support the company in the domicile system, since I think it could work if we had more pilots (I have no idea how many more) at each of the domiciles. You are probably right, maybe the company did figure out domiciles aren't working and held onto them as a bargaining chip. I can't really fault them for that, it doesn't seem very often that we have something you want.

 

[Guitar Guy]

Thanks for all the info.
I would think that ferrying the plane back to a domicile for mx / crew swap is just as costly as an airline, maybe more, I don't know. I'm just trying to support the company in the domicile system, since I think it could work if we had more pilots (I have no idea how many more) at each of the domiciles. You are probably right, maybe the company did figure out domiciles aren't working and held onto them as a bargaining chip. I can't really fault them for that, it doesn't seem very often that we have something you want.

Unless we had a fleet about twice the size of the current fleet, I don't see how dumb-a-ciles would help.

There's too much activity at too many places to throw in ferry legs solely for a crew swap or "routine" maintenance. Plus, if we ferried, say, a crew from DSM back to CMH just for a crew swap so the new crew could ferry out somewhere else, we'd be running up extra hours that count against inspection intervals. And that's not addressing the loss of crew productivity that someone in a dark room somewhere in the CMH area would be screaming about.

Your quest for efficiency and cost-cutting is laudable (not "laughable"). But the current dumb-a-cile system was an idea that should have never seen the light of day.

 

[Ultra Grump]

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.

Just curious, did you wake up one morning to find yourself drafted into service at NJA? If not, you had a vote on this contract as well - by accepting the job offer.

 

[CA1900]

Just curious, did you wake up one morning to find yourself drafted into service at NJA? If not, you had a vote on this contract as well - by accepting the job offer.

I'm aware of that, and no, nobody drafted me into working here. I came willingly, and I'm glad I did.

That said, I was responding specifically to the comment that the domiciles were "voted in," and I pointed out that non-HBA pilots didn't have a say in that vote. Symbolically, sure, by taking the job, but we both know that's not what I was talking about.

No malice intended; just trying to clear it up for NJAservicer.

 

[gutshotdraw]

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

Ding! We have a winner!

 

[Usual Suspect]

After having re-read the TA a few times now to make sure I wasn't missing something: Don't base your vote on the length of contract. In my assessment, the Company will not meet all the terms required to automatically extend the contract 2 1/2 years. Beyond that, decide for yourself and your situation which is better and vote accordingly.

What causes you to make this assessment?

 

[Ultra Grump]

That said, I was responding specifically to the comment that the domiciles were "voted in," and I pointed out that non-HBA pilots didn't have a say in that vote. Symbolically, sure, by taking the job, but we both know that's not what I was talking about.

Was the CBA voted in or not? What does the fact that post-ratification pilots were not here for the vote have to do with that? You would not be a post-rat if one of 2 things had happened: 1) you came on BEFORE the 2005 CBA (and there are plenty of folks here that waited until the contract was settled, and now bitch about the domiciles - I don't know if you're one of them or not); or 2) you turned down the job offer because of the domiciles. Simple.

 

[CA1900]

I'm going for option 3) Take the job when it was offered to me, and work to make it a better place to work. Just as you did.

 

[jonjuan]

I'm going for option 3) Take the job when it was offered to me, and work to make it a better place to work. Just as you did.

So, does that make you a post rat bitch?

 

[Fozzy]

4 weeks vacation at yr 12

That would be year 10.