767jetz and others, your comments need to be taken with a hefty amount of salt.
Keeping down the number of available pilots in any particular schedule allows the existing pilot group the opportunity to fly extra hours each month and pad their wallet, while allowing more pilots to take vacation, etc. I don't hear people complaining about that.
First off, I agree that no one would admit to an illegal work action. But I assure you that it is not the case. I must whole-heartedly disagree with several of your points.
ALPA is in the middle of a FIN (Fix It Now) campaign that is having some success repairing SOME work rule issues that are relatively cost neutral. And they are telling the members continuously (both on and off the record) that now is not the time to flex our muscle or “pull out the big guns†as they say. The word is that if it comes time to work STRICTLY by the rules, we will know. We are not there yet. Until then we do our jobs and think hard before waiving the few contract rules we still have in place.
The idea that we are deliberately “keeping down the number of available pilots†is outlandish. ALPA
HAS been complaining about the manpower issue since before LAST SUMMER. And it consistently falls on deaf ears. The only thing that saved the company from a meltdown in 2006 was a relatively low number of summer weather events at the hubs. Pilots have been screaming left and right about fatigue and the number of hours they fly. Reserve pilots are screaming about the number of deadhead flights they sit on to cover open flying from other domiciles. I was actually at LGA one day when a flight took a 1 hour delay to return to the gate and get me, so I could fly a Denver flight. I was the only person available system wide to cover it!
And your assertion about more vacations is even more ridiculous! Vacation numbers are set by the company and kept at a bare minimum. They even ask pilots to voluntarily sell vacation back to them. That means they pay you for your vacation hours in cash so that you WON’T take vacation.
Here is a little known fact. Reserve coverage models used to be set on a Domicile basis. (As it should be). During the bankruptcy, some manager was replaced and the new guy had the bright idea of switching to a system wide fleet coverage model. If they are short on 767 f/o’s for example, no problem since they have enough reserves in Chicago or Denver or even as far away as San Francisco or Seattle. So manpower projection was reduced and this guy got a bonus for all the money he “saved.†But now you have a severe weather event in Denver. The reserve you were hoping to dead head to NY to cover a flight to LA is now stuck in Denver. So the LA flight is cancelled and the reason they post on the board is “crew.†Eventually this reserve who is at the airport burning up his legal duty time now goes illegal. But we have a flight finally departing Denver with no f/o. No problem. Send in a pilot from Chicago. But wait… All the flights from Chicago to Denver are still cancelled. Get the picture?
The manpower plan is broken, and ALPA has been trying to fix it for over a year. The single biggest thing that would improve every pilot's quality of life and improve schedule reliability and customer satsifaction is additional manpower. (For all work groups) It would mean seniority advancement and progression that leads to more pay and better schedules much easier than picking up a few extra hours here and there. It is simply money the company is unwilling to spend. It’s more important to reward the same people responsible for the mess.
