well that was quick.....

[OPECJet]

Opec,

You either don't understand the travel costs and logistical challenges associated with long range international flying, or haven't fully thought the issue through. The costs are tremendous and are ultimately passed on to the owners. Even if you foolishly believe your owners are willing to pay anything, how do you think they'll feel about waiting around for a day or two while their relief pilot tries to catch up to the airplane because it changed it's itinerary while the relief pilot sat on a 14 hour flight to the wrong city? International flying isn't like going to Teterboro where there are dozens of guys waiting to rotate onto your airplane. However, if you really think driving more owners away will somehow help get you back to work, you are certainly entitled to your opinion.

The most important thing your brothers can do to get you back to work is take care of the owners. If they stop doing that, you have absolutely no chance.

I had posted that if 7 day schedules don't work in the long haul dept then the company needs to negotiate something with the pilot group (it's buried in one of these posts). I can see where the need would lie. I did not realize the contract already has a provision for longer tours the company isn't using.

I would bet those extended days all went to the same few guys over and over to boot.

Guys, Pervis had already stated, defended, and explained his reason for extending last year. It was hashed out and everything was rosy until the topic comes up again. Man up and let it lie. He did....

 

[gutshotdraw]

The Bubba Club is alive and well OPEC and the same names* seem to pop up in conjunction with trips that simply can't be done in seven days and extended days are the most cost efficient solution. When there are three pilots on the crew, the extended day statistics add up that much faster. Believe me, they're not asking people in the GLC to extend in order to do more Teterboro to West Palm turns or else I'd be turning them down constantly.

I was also not aware of 19.9 in the CBA apparently allowing for 8-10 day tours. Perhaps the start dates for such a plan are too rigid to be useful. Extending ain't my thing but my basic point is that there is a legitimate, cost-based, business justification for the skewed VED numbers in the GLC. At a guess, 80% or more of the GLC extended days are tied to International itineraries where airline crew swaps are off the hook expensive.

*BTW, the Bubbas are welcome to all the international they want as far as I'm concerned. I'll take VNY and BFI and LAS and even PBI all day long. Er, as long as they throw in the occasional Hawaii. Like say, today.

 

[gutshotdraw]

Okay, I just got done reading section 19.9. Well, I had to wait a few minutes for the glaze of legalese to clear from my eyes.

As suspected, the section is SO complicated to comply with that, if enacted, the grievances would be thicker than the tourists in a Beijing knock-off shopping mall.

Ain't. Gonna. Happen. Extended days for long international trips is going to be the paradigm. It skews the numbers and makes the GLC look like a bunch of greedy, furloughed-pilot-hating primmadonnas* but the alternative of airline crew swaps in Timbuktu is NOT a good business model.




*already the belief for some around NJA....

 

[G4dude]

Of course the union can't say don't extend. It does take a minute amount of intelligence to read between the lines and realize extending is something you don't do when people are on furlough.

This was directed at Pervis.

If pilots don't extend, the cost of the business model goes up by requiring overstaffing, rendering the company less profitable and endangering our jobs. How does increasing NJA's overhead secure pilots' jobs? Alternately, NJA would have to raise fees to the owners, rendering us uncompetitive, allowing our competitors to make inroads with our owners, costing us jobs. Featherbedding always costs jobs, long term.

 

[pilotyip]

If pilots don't extend, the cost of the business model goes up by requiring overstaffing, rendering the company less profitable and endangering our jobs. How does increasing NJA's overhead secure pilots' jobs? Alternately, NJA would have to raise fees to the owners, rendering us uncompetitive, allowing our competitors to make inroads with our owners, costing us jobs. Featherbedding always costs jobs, long term.

Stop that! this is FI, we do not deal in reality on this site, only in the fantasy world of ferry god-mothers who give us anything we want, because we want it.

 

[rajflyboy]

integration

more IBB debauchery

 

[OPECJet]

If pilots don't extend, the cost of the business model goes up by requiring overstaffing, rendering the company less profitable and endangering our jobs. How does increasing NJA's overhead secure pilots' jobs? Alternately, NJA would have to raise fees to the owners, rendering us uncompetitive, allowing our competitors to make inroads with our owners, costing us jobs. Featherbedding always costs jobs, long term.

If pilots don't extend then the company would be forced to negotiate something that works. No one is saying the company doesn't need / require / deserve relief on scheduling the GV crews. This is something that could be done in short order. The rub is the company would rather negotiate with individual pilots outside the scope of the CBA. I find it highly likely the company would find financial and operational benefit from negotiating scheduling relief. They would rather divide the pilot group. Given the current makeup of both sides, NJA is going to sink if this keeps up.

 

[NachoMamma]

If pilots don't extend, the cost of the business model goes up by requiring overstaffing, rendering the company less profitable and endangering our jobs. How does increasing NJA's overhead secure pilots' jobs? Alternately, NJA would have to raise fees to the owners, rendering us uncompetitive, allowing our competitors to make inroads with our owners, costing us jobs. Featherbedding always costs jobs, long term.

Exactly...so here's the million dollar question: Why on Earth are 95% of our GIV pilots Captains? Talk about overstaffing! Our GIV overhead is approximately double what it should be due to a near 100% PIC staffing "good ol boys" club decision that was made by the EMT. If they were really worried about saving money and being competitive, they would exercise their contractual rights within the CBA, announce the fleet in disposal status, and DOWNGRADE 40% of these incredibly junior pilots immediately. Total savings...over $5 Million annually. That should cut down on the "featherbedding".

 

[imacdog]

Stop that! this is FI, we do not deal in reality on this site, only in the fantasy world of ferry god-mothers who give us anything we want, because we want it.

Reality also said "Let's fire all of our DA-20 pilots since that fleet is in disposal and let all the DC-9 pilots, no matter their company seniority, keep their jobs". Worked pretty well for your company. Oh wait, am I not supposed to talk about that reality anymore?

 

[pilotyip]

Reality also said "Let's fire all of our DA-20 pilots since that fleet is in disposal and let all the DC-9 pilots, no matter their company seniority, keep their jobs". Worked pretty well for your company. Oh wait, am I not supposed to talk about that reality anymore?

I love this you are so funny. Now that may well be reality, but you post this as though I have any influence on what upper management decides to do. My reality is sitting in a cockpit at my union airline, hearing about how unhappy another pilot is, and that he deserves this and he deserves that. Me I was just happy to have a job, and was worried management would go, I am not putting up with this crap.