View Single Post
Old 01-09-2016 | 06:43 PM
  #30  
UALinIAH
Line Holder
 
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 1,200
Likes: 33
From: 777 CA
Default

Originally Posted by Thor
The example I gave above has been a persistent rumor. Specifically, flight Ops wanting to eliminate flying FO lines and require the captain to "appoint" the flying FO for each leg.

Aside from the seniority and past practice issues this would create, do you think it would be a "large" enough change to withdraw participation?

Under the current agreement we can save ourselves. Under the TA we rely on the FAA to save us from a "large" change in operating practices, no?

I want to like it, but .....
As Jsled said I shouldn't have used the word large. If the company wants to change an FRMS route they have to reapply and it would still involve ALPA.

The issue of Bunky and FO having the same ID number isn't an FRMS issue. I have full confidence in Todd and the grievance committee that the'd get that fixed as a past practice. He has an excellent track record and has already won a System Board level grievance setting past practice as a standard.
Reply