Issue: “Management feels that overtime will not be paid on those first 3 days off of the new month since the crewmember showed a scheduled reserve day during transition and therefore existed a conflict as per SP 317 7. SAPA argued that there is no conflict because the crewmember did in fact bid legally.”
Outcome: “It was indicated to the group during the SAPA meeting that this argument went nowhere with Management and that for the time being we agreed to disagree and would take this issue back to our respective groups for discussion and consensus….. overtime will not apply. Although we did not agree to this, we did agree to take back to our groups for discussion.” No further discussion was recorded on this issue.
Issue: “Management feels that… If the crewmember were required to show early the next day he/she would have to do so, but this goes against policy that indicates that a day off is a “calendar” day off of 24 hours.”
Outcome: “There were no solutions offered by the group at the SAPA meeting. Chris challenged the group to give the issue some thought prior to the next meeting. No further discussion was recorded on this issue.”
ISSUE: Reserves being denied to swap with other reserves:
OUTCOME: Even with the following: “General consensus was that this is in violation of the Crewmember Policy Manual. This topic to be discussed at the next Flight Ops. meeting.” Ultimately it went nowhere. To be clear sapa actually agreed that this was “in violation of the crewmember policy manual” it never got fixed. Anybody see a trend here? Honestly I don’t think we could do worse if we had no one “representing” us and I use the term
”representing” very loosely with Sapa.
Issue: “An overview and discussion of how we can operate more efficiently as an employee group while increasing our opportunity to make our schedules better, make more money and have more time off. Reserve buckets and how we operate our reserve system was discussed. This was all a preliminary discussion of a larger task that SAPA will focus on for the next 6 months. More detailed information will be forthcoming as the infrastructure of a task force takes shape.”
Outcome: No change in schedules, a pay cut or freeze depending on how you interpret flying a 70/90 seater for 50 seat pay. The creation of the bucket system. Final details were never released until this policy was sprung on us later after having been “the number one project for six months”! Also, it went from temporary to permanent. No pilot input whatsoever. No Long call reserve either as was supposedly going to happen for giving the bucket system to management. This is what was netted from a six month “focus… to make schedules better, make more money and have more time off” by Sapa. Wow, somebody got their monies worth…unfortunately it wasn’t skywest pilots!
Issue: SAPA Hotline is available at extension #4721. Updates are planned for every Friday.
Outcome: I called this number and none other than Todd Smidke’s voice directs me to call Mike Eisenstat if I have any problems. Called and left a message with Eisenstat, never heard back. As of September first there has not been an update made for seven months.
Issue: SAPA Hotsheets. Update sheets are produced and distributed by pilots, without management assistance.
Outcome: (First month delivery was late, but distribution should improve as we adjust to the process.) Hotsheet distribution has discontinued indefinitely with no further explanation!
Issue: Proficiency flying “It is the unanimous consensus of the SAPA group that the company is practicing call-out methods that are not in accordance with the Crewmember Policy Manual. At the next Flight Ops. Meeting we will address reserve “proficiency” flying” and at the next meeting: Reserves being called out of seniority for “proficiency” reasons: General consensus was that this is in violation of the Crewmember Policy Manual. This topic to be discussed at the next Flight Ops. meeting….
Outcome: “Flight Ops management has agreed to cease the practice of assigning reserve trips upon any bases other than those defined in the Crewmember Policy manual. For those of you who might be confused, “The Bucket System” we have now IS proficiency flying, only with a different name. Sapa on the one hand unanimously agreed that proficiency flying is a violation of the so called policy manual yet later would go on to co-write this same basic protocol renaming it “the bucket system”. Its objective is to limit all reservists to below 75 hours. This could also be interpreted as a work rule change that decreases senior reservist ability to control their quality of life and a pay cut for those who historically tried to maximize their pay on reserve. There has been no direct benefit to the pilots for having this forced upon them. Not even a long call reserve that was originally touted by the Sapa Communications director as a possible gimme for allowing management this huge concession.”
Issue: Procedures for Crewmembers Stranded Out of Domicile.
Outcome: “Disapproved – this is common sense and we felt that it did not necessarily need to be made policy. No further details or explanation is listed.”
Issue: Scheduling Workshop Review – A brief review of the Scheduling Workshop was accomplished.
Outcome: “Some immediate results of the conference have been manifest by temporary policy changes that are now in effect. It was agreed that if nothing else came out of the conference other than the exploration of the feasibility of preferential bidding, then it was all worth it. Not only does preferential bidding give direct control of monthly line bidding to the crewmember, it also takes care of transition problems, displacement.” It has been noted by several astute crewmembers that pref. bidding does nothing to improve the trips/pairing/sit time and this is the real issue regarding poor schedules. Furthermore, there is much concern from the members that there is no “snap back” provisions to pull the eject on this if management uses it too much in their favor. When repeatedly questioned on this Sapa reps, including Kathy Archibald get defensive suggesting the company will treat us fairly as they always do and such “snapback” language is not necessary. Time will tell.
Issue: Addendum to the Pay Agreement. Much discussion and a recent poll showed an overwhelming number of pilots (90%) supported a separation of pay between 50 and 70 seat jets right away. Many pilots have pointed out that this would be the place to start with regards to dividing the equipment/pay rather than between 70/90 (although, this should also be pursued down the road) as the chances of 90 seaters arriving on the property anytime soon are remote.
Outcome: “The consensus of the group was to give the Executive Board the go-ahead to discuss with Management the possibility of amending the TA that was recently passed with a wedge between the 50-70 and the 71-99 seat aircraft. If successful in separating the two categories, pay rates within these categories will remain as agreed upon during this last TA vote for the next 18 months starting on July 1, 2003.” The general members voted and 90% want a completely separate pay rate for the 50 and 70 right now, this in large part seems to be getting ignored by Sapa. Once again, the target seems to be getting missed by those we look to for leadership and execution of our desires. It is clear however that management seems to get what they want almost every time, in the end.
Issue: Request for 96 hour time to move being denied. “Management has requested that the crewmember place the desired 96-hours free from duty prior to the adjusted bid period so that crew planning has ample time to provide coverage.
Outcome: “The Representative Board felt that this was a reasonable request and would in fact be a benefit for the crewmember in that less requests for the 96 hours would be turned down.” Interesting logic!