Originally Posted by
Adlerdriver
So is this:
“Once this check-in has been accomplished, the pilot shall no longer be considered as deviating, for the purposes of subsequent delays, revisions, and all trip services.”
The language you quote has been there since at least 2006. Mine is new as of 2015. Your quote is still required to delineate the responsibilities of those pilots who can’t or choose not to join a segment of the scheduled DH. But, it doesn’t negate the new 2015 language.
Look at it like the old 2006 references to first class DHs being required for duty periods greater than 16 hours. That’s still in the CBA but doesn’t negate the new 2015 “lay-flat seat is good enough” addition. It’s ok for the company to use new contract provisions to their advantage but we’ll take what they give us and like it? Is that your attitude?
You keep referrring to risk as if I’m accepting more somehow by joining a segment of the scheduled DH. Where is the added risk? I’m already deviating. What’s the alternative? Avoid the scheduled DH altogether and guarantee that I have absolutely no chance in getting support for a disruption? If taking that scheduled DH segment is a prudent deviation option or part of a back-up plan for my deviation, how is it that I’m taking on more risk than any other deviation? Sooner or later one has to commit to a plan to get where they’re going. When it’s prudent, I’m going to try to incorporate the scheduled DH or a portion of it into my primary or backup plan. If that means I can uncheck the appropriate boxes at 60 hours, great. If I have to check them all at that time, then I will. But that doesn’t mean I’m going to avoid the scheduled DH if it comes to that, not do my final check-in as I’m allowed or roll over and shrug my shoulders if I get told “no” in the event of an issue. I don’t share your “gee, the almighty company always does what’s best for them so we better let them” attitude. If it comes to a grievance (which I highly doubt), it won’t be my first and I’ll win.
I see the trouble, it's reading comprehension for you. All I have ever said is that if you plan on using the scheduled second leg, then don't check the box that says you are going to deviate on that leg. If you do deviate on both legs, and then try to say that you changed your plans and now are taking the scheduled leg as a back-up, don't expect the company to help you or be on your side if something happens. I have never said we should let the company do whatever they want and just roll over. All I have done is show you that there is language in the contract that the company will use to argue that you are wrong if they want to. I'm glad you think you would win a grievance. I hope you would too. What I don't appreciate is your mightier, holier than thou attitude when someone tries to have an intelligent discussion with you and attempt to point out potential pitfalls in your interpretation of the contract. Maybe your the guy from the NC that assured us that we would get a first class bank even if booked in lie flat seats even though many pointed out the language that stated otherwise. How did that work out.
I'm done attempting to discuss this with someone who is intent on arguing. You must be on the "Tool Box."