View Single Post
Old 05-24-2014 | 05:33 AM
  #158458  
Bucking Bar's Avatar
Bucking Bar
Can't abide NAI
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,078
Likes: 15
From: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Default

Originally Posted by Sink r8
The issue is that reps thought we'd like the SDP's, but made the basic mistake of not validating that before it got to a vote. That's the bad news. The good news is that pilots saw the value of their involvement, and reps saw the dangers of straying too far without consultation. They did a good job staying right on top of the NC, but forgot to make sure we could stay right on top of the discussion.
Well stated Sir.

You are correct, we as a MEC, thought the SDP would be a way to give pilots what they wanted, which was fewer 30 hour sits and more time at home.

Then C20 (where the idea came from on paper) got very defensive when the politics went South (what a pun) and tried to deflect. Their pilots want memrat to distance themselves politically from an idea which is already dead for this round and was a joint MEC position by this stage. Their calls for recall are completely over the top ... and of course we had a unanimous vote which seals the deal. It was all so emo.

Perhaps a better tact (and what a lot of reps have done) is to step up responsibly and state "yes, we directed the NC to the SDP." Because I think the idea which originated from C 20 isn't bad. We probably will see SDP in future negotiations. I think it is in our benefit to address and limit this back side of the clock flying because as is we have the worst case scenario of being able to do it as a day line that just duties in late with very few protections and we can't benefit from the scheduling (more time at home) and pay (more credit) that these might allow.

Briefly then, we need to continue this SDP discussion because I think they could be a benefit.

Last edited by Bucking Bar; 05-24-2014 at 05:44 AM.