Are other ALPA airlines saying that those pilots who are not yet complete with IOE, but who are on the seniority list, are not even considered probationary pilots until completion of IOE as appears to be the case here, despite being on the seniority list, being employed as a pilot, etc.?

Regarding spending capital...no capital would or should be required to clearly define a new hire’s employment status, ie elimination of a “gray area,” one way or another. Either they are jetblue “pilots” covered under the CBA (in a probationary status) or they are not, and that needs to be in black and white...not a “gray area” as ALPA is saying. If that’s how the company and ALPA want to roll, they need to change the definition of pilot and/or first officer in the CBA to clearly indicate completion of training/IOE is a requirement to gain such status. Or, do the right thing and clarify it to include every person in this situation (who are not yet done with training/IOE but on the seniority list) as probationary pilots.

Probationary period, as defined in the CBA, already begins at date of hire and lasts 365 days. So it’s already in conflict with the notion that they are not covered under the CBA until complete with IOE, as that definition indicates the CBA defined probationary period begins day 1...if the CBA didn’t apply til IOE was complete, then that line can’t really apply to a pilot trainee. See what I’m getting at?