View Single Post
Old 10-21-2012 | 06:37 PM
  #113249  
1234
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 782
Likes: 0
From: 717
Default

Originally Posted by flyallnite
Wow, this place has sure got quiet after that dust up over the LCA notes. Notes that I might add, have always been passed to the line pilots, who as far as I know, are sharing it with whomever they please. And it's not like the notes contained any state secrets.. come on. We MAY order some planes, we MAY do this or that, etc.

Anyhoo-- Just wanted to say that the memo from Contract Admin regarding the 330 rest arbitration decision was missing one crucial statement of fact. So crucial, that it probably was the foundation of the company's arguments. We'll see if it gets published, but, DALPA has been more than accommodating on the 7ER rest seat debacle, and I mean debacle for many, many years. That seat was never suitable for rest, and the complaints to mgmt and the union were met with deaf ears. Now we have sidewall lights blasting into the (new) 'rest' seat when the FAR clearly states that the curtain will block out light... and DALPA is 'workin on it' Well, I feel so much better now.

The CROT's inability to deal with the substandard 7ER rest seat handed the company just what they needed to do the same to the A330. This is the sort of thing that DALPA used to consider 'leverage'. You know... we'll sign this TA, but we want a bunk, not a seat. Instead it went to the arbitrator, knowing full well the die had already been cast. To me, that's just a very public failure.

Actually, I think that the most telling fact was in the statement "Consequently, the ALPA members of the CROT did not approve
the proposed change and made a separate recommendation of an above deck rest facility."

Just so we are clear, this was a baseball style arbitration and we wanted an above deck rest facility. There is not one A330 in the world that has that and not even sure it's possible. There is a good idea.