PSA Captains flying right seat?

Section 25 paragraph Q. No Captain, except an IOE Line Check Airman, will be required to fly as a First Officer. A Line Check Airman will only fly as a First Officer when no other First Officer is available. A Line Check Airman may not pick up First Officer open time.
 
It was my understanding that its the training guys flying in the right seat at ASA. They are told which seat to bid. I think its pretty dumpy they get captain pay to fly as FO's, but it's in the contract.
 
Captains in the right seat is better then downgrading people to the right seat, No?

True, but when the issue is there aren't any bodies to fill EITHER seat (and yet there are people on the street waiting to come back) it's a bit of a harsh move.

As far as the OP's question, Sim and Ground Instructors who are typed can fly left or right seat. They get paid salary either way (I think) so they are kind of making Captain pay in the right seat.

The issue here was that Line Checkairman (who holds a right seat qualification ONLY to do training) should only be put in the right seat while using their Checkairman Letter (ie, doing training) and be getting paid override pay for it. As far as I know, when this has happened recently (and it's been a few times) the LCA has been paid straight captain pay and not an override. Back when there were a bunch of furloughed mainline guys here as LCAs they were told to do the same thing and a few of them actually handed in their letters as opposed to be forced into the right seat with no override.

Regular line captains are not right seat qualified per our POI's rule.
 
Happens all the time at CHQ. I bitched to crew planning once and they told me that they could have downgraded more Captains if that would have made me happier. The Captains are still paid their CA wage though.
 
I'd say that a company that doesn't hesitate to put a CA in the seat as a FO (both airlines I have worked for do this), it demonstrates that the right seat can support that compensation level.
 
When it happened at XJT a few months ago ( a large number of CA as FO assignments), it was because a LOT of FOs called in sick. So many in fact that they didn't have enough reserves to cover for it. It wasn't that we were understaffed per se, but rather the company didn't expect that many sick calls at once.

As a Captain, I've flown in the right seat twice. Both times I could have been in the left seat, but said "nah" and just kicked it as an FO. One was a two-leg day trip, the other a maintenance flight.
 
When it happened at XJT a few months ago ( a large number of CA as FO assignments), it was because a LOT of FOs called in sick. So many in fact that they didn't have enough reserves to cover for it. It wasn't that we were understaffed per se, but rather the company didn't expect that many sick calls at once.

I love how you have to put, "per se" in there. The fact of the matter is sick calls, fatigue, loss of medical are things a company should plan into crew planning. And thus when it comes to these situations I must blame the company for poor crew planning.... And thus poor staffing models. If staffing does not take into account vacations, sick time, personal days, fatigue calls etc perhaps they need to re-evaluate their systems....
 
Captains in the right seat is better then downgrading people to the right seat, No?

Not only that, the company has to pay them captain pay. Sounds like Karma to me! No offense to any furloughed folks (I am), but it has nothing to do with them. Because of the cost of that maneuver, I'm pretty sure the company doesn't like it anymore than us furloughed.
 
Not only that, the company has to pay them captain pay. Sounds like Karma to me! No offense to any furloughed folks (I am), but it has nothing to do with them. Because of the cost of that maneuver, I'm pretty sure the company doesn't like it anymore than us furloughed.

I disagree. If you need to have CAs flying in the right seat more than once in a while, you're staffing's off. The only reason the company is doing it is because it's cheaper than paying employment benefits to an FO. So, it DOES have something to do with the furloughed guys. It's simply cheaper to pay someone CA pay several times than it is to pay health insurance benefits, 401k, plus pay that FO to sit in that seat.
 
I disagree. If you need to have CAs flying in the right seat more than once in a while, you're staffing's off.

True! And the proof is Mesa. They can NEVER get staffing "right". We almost always have CA on CA flying, with almost 200 guys (and increasing) on the street...
 
Word from our negotiations crew is that our lovely mgt here is now saying we are over staffed :)... This stuff is happening in October, before sick calls, holidays, and other issues start to kick in and these same fools are saying we're over staffed.... :( Hmmm..
 
Word from our negotiations crew is that our lovely mgt here is now saying we are over staffed :)... This stuff is happening in October, before sick calls, holidays, and other issues start to kick in and these same fools are saying we're over staffed.... :( Hmmm..

We've been "overstaffed" per the business model for well over a year and a half now. The problem is, the BUSINESS MODEL is broken. It doesn't take into account sick calls or missed commutes. Thanks to the lovely new Delta benefits, that last one has increased. They bank on FOs being broke and picking up open time until they drop and CAs doing the same (replace "being broke" with "needing a new boat" though). Then they run reserves until they can't use them anymore because they're broken, twisted human beings. The wear and tear on us is starting to show. Fewer people are picking up open time, so MORE reserves are having to be burned on that. We're getting unproductive trips like DH to DTW, sit for 9:30, highspeed to IAD, back to DTW, sit for 9:15, DH to MEM. As a result, we're still JMing on the CA and FO side. We FINALLY got someone to say "We're overstaffed per the business model, but we're understaffed when you take into account "unplanned absences."" Problem is, accountants only look at what we're supposed to have per the business model and not what it takes in the real world.
 
Captains in the right seat is better then downgrading people to the right seat, No?

Wrong. Downgrading costs companies a whole lot of money and resources, which is an incentive to properly staff the right seat. If they have no downside to understaffing the FO positions, then they can keep the CA side heavy, not staff enough FOs (screwing the FO lineholders), and still save money because it's cheaper to pay a captain to sometimes fly right seat than it is to properly staff the position.
 
Word from our negotiations crew is that our lovely mgt here is now saying we are over staffed :)

Wait, you got information from the Negotiating Committee? You'd better sleep with your eyes open...

At PSA Captains are qualified in the left seat, only Sim and Line Check Airmen are dual seat qualified. In the past when we were very short staffed and there were no pilots on furlough the company offered SDO pay to Line Check Airmen to fly in the right seat. I haven't heard about the story in question, but the only times we're supposed to occupy the right seat is for checking purposes. Typically line checks can be difficult to schedule for reserve Captains and our scheduling department will take a trip that would typically be in round two and assign it to a Sim Check Airman. They won't assign a RSV FO to the trip, instead they will put the Check Airman in the right seat and have them give line checks to as many RSV CA's as possible during the trip. There was also some IOE for pilots returning from medical leave. Other than those examples there's not much of this going on.
 
Back
Top