Rocketman99
Frozen Guppy Manipulator
How do you figure that to make up for it? You should already be maxing out the 401k for the free company money!
Effect of Phil Trenery Still Being Felt
- Thread starter jynxyjoe
- Start date
How do you figure that to make up for it? You should already be maxing out the 401k for the free company money!
Rocketman99
Frozen Guppy Manipulator
Company match contribution to the 401k.
TUCKnTRUCK
That guy
I do... I was saying more to plant the idea in the heads of those who don't.
bronco21016
I know H.T.M.L. (How To Meet Ladies)
How often is this tactic used and how often does it work? I just don't see how wasting more money helps us in the long run if management doesn't budge. We'll just drive ourselves into bankruptcy and give them a scapegoat.
Not saying I wouldn't be all for it. Just thinking through the possible unintended consequences.
jynxyjoe
Queso King
Well I hope no pilot is taking matters into their own hands at this point.
I think the union guys are getting a briefing from ALPA financial later on next week, we will have more information then. From what I understand, the numbers Menke and his boys handed over is fairly clear and simple and there is a way out of this crap without a any bankruptcy.
I guess ALPA financials reaction to the 5% was not, "ARE YOU KIDDING ME, BURN IT DOWN!", it was "5%... why only 5%?"
Part of the problem I have, is that I see bankruptcy the only stop this bus is letting us off on. It appears there is another reality, another bus stop we can get off on. We will either take a paycut now, or during bankruptcy, possibly not both. This is a logical possibility I am forced to accept. I hate getting real emotional with all of this but I find it impossible to dismiss history that most givebacks to the employeer always end in a bankruptcy which decreases pay further. Waiting for more information from the union reps.
I guess I'm wait and see at this point.
crazyjaydawg
Well-Known Member
The biggest reason why I would rather let them take out pay in bk instead of giving it up voluntarily is just that...there's a big difference between rape and consent.
When it comes to negotiating a new contract, the first thing the company will say is, "you guys agreed to these pay cuts, we didn't take anything!"
When it comes to negotiating a new contract, the first thing the company will say is, "you guys agreed to these pay cuts, we didn't take anything!"
CzechAirman
Well-Known Member
Why wouldn't you give your passengers the most comfortable cabin temp that you can give them at all times? Why do you have to be pissed off at your company to treat your passengers better?
WalterSobchak
Well-Known Member
Because they "lease the apu's and they want them only used 5 minutes prior to engine start" so its a balance of comfort and helping the company be economical. However if they go all Prince John and try and steal my forest they will get a little Robin Hood thrown at them.
jynxyjoe
Queso King
Hehe. Better question might be, why is it when the pilots are pissed and do all the things the managers don't want us to do, the passengers get better service? Quick pay the managers more money, that'll fix it, tax breaks too.
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
Move, uniforms, training costs, displacements and uber-vacancies. Honestly, I think they're trying to do too much too soon. I looked at my pay stub, and they've paid me almost $20k as a result of my displacement from MEM to JFK. The kicker is MOST of the guys displaced to JFK or DTW were able to hold MEM again on the last vacancy. So, they paid all that money to displace someone for less than a year. What cost them more? Paying everyone displaced that much $$$ or deadheading a reserve from MEM to DTW or JFK to cover what that person is covering now? Don't even get me started on the complete and total waste we're seeing on training costs...
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
For the record, I followed company procedure on the APU last night going into DAL (a Pinnacle run station, BTW). I still wound up starting the APU after the #2 engine had been running for about 4 minutes after I got the "chocks in" sign from the ramper. Perhaps they should start the APU education drive with the ground crews and not the pilots.....
SpiceWeasel
Tre Kronor
We have been instructed not to use the APU, which, if you have ever been 1/51 in the cabin, is the only thing that remotely keeps the cabin cooled.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Because they "lease the apu's and they want them only used 5 minutes prior to engine start" so its a balance of comfort and helping the company be economical. However if they go all Prince John and try and steal my forest they will get a little Robin Hood thrown at them.
Who cares what they've "instructed?" They said the same thing when I was there, but the APU came on when I got on the plane, it wasn't turned off until the climb check, and it came back on when descending through 10k feet. The paying passengers (and the crew) deserve a comfortable cabin. If the company is too incompetent to hook up external air at the gate, and the CRJ can't produce adequate airflow with just engine bleeds on the ground, then start the APU. It's called captain's authority.
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
My biggest beef with that memo was this: they said it's okay to get a "bleed misconfig" during the descent as long as the visible moisture wasn't below a certain level. Now, I know that the main reason we're not supposed to have the anti-ice on with the 10th stage bleeds off the engines is in the event of a go around, HOWEVER, until Bombardier re-writes CH 3 eliminating that limitation, it's still a limitation no matter what the company memo says.
SpiceWeasel
Tre Kronor
Well in that case CA authority says we can run the engines up to a level that supports air flow.
Seriously, the company pays me to operate the aircraft per their books, that is how I will run it. Especially if the books inefficiencies shine through when we are being told we are getting a pay cut.
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
True, but to support what ATN said, I have yet to not be able to use the FOM to justify running the APU. Less than 40 minute turn? It's in there. No ground power? It's in there. Cabin temps? It's in there. Greater than 12 minute taxi with high cabin temps? In there. And there's always the door that swings both ways: CA's discretion. It's in the FOM so the company can dump all the responsibility on the CA if something goes wrong. We can also use it to make it more comfortable for our passengers.
Sure, you could go for the engines running air flow (and I have with a deferred APU a couple of times), but I wouldn't go past max break away thrust just in case.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Yeah, you can do that if you want. Captain's authority and all. But it's a bit ridiculous when you have a device installed that is designed specifically for this purpose. Not to mention that you can't do it at the gate or if you're tight on fuel.
So, you're basically screwing over the passengers and your fellow crew members just because you want to stick it to the company and let their "inefficiencies shine through?" That's pretty screwed up. Take care of your passengers. Your attitude is the reason that it sucks so much to deadhead or jumpseat in the back of airplanes so often. Nothing worse than cooking in the back of a fully-loaded CRJ when it's 90 degrees outside just because the captain is too stubborn to turn on the APU.