Originally Posted by
Scoop
It depends on what kind of data the company has on them.
They either have proof or they don't. I'd contend that they absolutely don't in their ridiculous lookback witch hunt nonsense, and take it to the system board, all day long.
OTOH, if they DO have proof of an actual offense, then use that actual instance to pursue fair and appropriate discipline. But sorry, they simply don't get to pull years of non rev records and use that as comprehensive proof of past crimes. That's insane and cannot be tolerated.
It will be interesting to see what "proposed changes" to SC/reserve come up in the next section 6.
They can propose anything they want.
So can we.
I'd actually be somewhat receptive to some sort of reasonable verification system for SC...if and only if it included a reduction in monthly SC's. Otherwise, not interested.
Suppose every time these guys have a trip they leave a easily verifiable digital trail - KCM, Jump seat, Non-rev etc - every time they have a trip and show up in base. Yet for years there is Zip, nada, squat for every SC.
Anecdotal, barely circumstantial, and therefore substantively irrelevant.
I will say innocent until proven guilty not the other way around
Agree.
but the fact is these guys were out of position when they were needed and apparently out of position for years.
But you don't know that and can't know that. Therefore its irrelevant and BS witch hunting. Hold them fully accountable for the times they got busted. But using fantasy hypotheticals based on anecdotal evidence (or on lack of proof of innocence) is a grave and present danger to everyone on every issue going forward.
The guys that abuse it by sitting SC way out of position are punks and should get serious time off for even early offenses. But we just can't use this kind of overzealous nonsense to prove guilt because they can't prove innocence. Not for this, not for anything.
How much bargaining capitol do you suppose the union should spend on guys that were cheating?
Zero.
But representation, even aggressive and expensive, isn't "bargaining capital" and we can't EVER allow the company to take hostages for any issue in an attempt to use as a bargaining tool.
It will be very easy to see if this was a one off or if these guys were gaming the system for years.
Wrong. You simply can not prove to the extent its necessary to prove something happened with idiotic retroactive lookbacks based on circumstantial evidence like this.
Oh and how many guys take the Bus and train across country to commute to work - I hope that you are not really serious here.
Over the years I've taken a train once, several states away (and know others who have several times, mostly in the NE but whatever) as well as drove relatively long distances both myself as well as bumming a ride from someone else, again several states away. A couple times I bought an airline ticket too, and once even a ride on a GA plane, although that was largely pre planned. In any case, the appearance of impropriety, however reasonable it may be to conclude, is irrelevant in establishing concrete proof necessary to fire someone. It simply has to be that way.
We need to throw everything we have at defending against that sort of insanity. Not because the few guys in question who actually got busted for being idiots (and screwing their fellow pilots) "deserve" to get off (they don't and they won't) but because process matters (a LOT) and we can't stand for this type of process. Period.