Busboy

From D.W.'s letter:

"...We expect and have tasked our SIG/PSIT to accommodate reasonable requests in the scheduling process and to acknowledge legitimate business concerns while safeguarding our members from the debilitating effects of fatigue..."

And, from the attached Chimenti/Maliniak letter:

"...While the existence and maintenance of pairing and flight line construction with features of city purity and deadhead commonality continues to be a desirable solution for some domestic pairings, the parties recognize that in the changing business environment, city purity and deadhead commonality should not be used to stop change or frustrate building lines within acceptable financial and operational parameters..."

Does anyone else out there have a problem with this? Who decides what defines "acceptable financial and operational parameters"? How much money does this company need to make, anyway?

We just gave away something that's very important to a lot of our crewmembers. Can you say, "West coast DBL deadheads"? Good luck ever trying to get this back. What did we get for it?

I know, I know. The company could have done this long ago. But, they didn't. Why? I believe, it is because it would have pessed a lot of people off. Just like the 1st wave of the optimizer.

But, now it's OK. Because we agreed to it, in writing. I believe that letter will trump "past practice" in any legal hearing.

B.O.H.I.C.A