Originally Posted by
Viper25
I understand your points. But the only reason it improved your QOL (or the GS pilot’s QOL) is because it was a compensation for violating the contract.
Are we supposed to get benefits from the contract based on what it actually provides, or based on what we can get for violations, or both?
I can see the argument for both, but if I had to pick one, I’d easily say the former. The point of the contract is to derive value from its contents. I’d be willing to bet that even if the company paid all the compensatory 23M7s correctly, we would still have a large group up in arms about how the company is violating 23N/O.
Its honestly a more philosophical question about the nature of a labor contract, and as I said earlier, these weren’t all my ideas.
Fair points.
Originally Posted by
CBreezy
SK was involved only in the fact that when asked if unlimited batch sizes would fix the 23m7 usage, he said it should. The MEC chair along with C44 was looking for an excuse to eliminate batch sizes and, frankly, to get rid of SK because he wasn't just blindly nodding along with whatever crazy idea they put out.
To your second point, banking your QOL solely on a remedy for contract violations is short sighter and, frankly, ridiculous. It isn't even remotely relatable to "trading away the commuter clause." Yes, maybe you and a few others get trips dropped or 23m7 pay for the company violating the contract. The fact is, the company gets away with FAR more than they compensate. In the end, I'd much rather they just follow the contract. Let's say, in the fall, they realize they need to train their schedulers better and they don't improperly notify anymore going forward. Is that a concession to you?
I can't believe we have to have the same conversation we had in 19-23 that just because the company isn't losing doesn't mean it's a concession. Yes, the batch size giveaway orchestrated by DA and DH was a huge white flag. But that doesn't mean that trading a human leaving a voicemail for a robot leaving a voicemail for something valuable to the pilot group is a concession.
Nope that would be a unilateral action by the company that it is well within its rights to take. Would it affect my QOL? Absolutely. But so would closing the SEA pilot base or giving all our Hawaii flying to SLC. Both of those would be above-board actions the company could unilaterally take that would still degrade my QOL.
The difference is I expect that from the company, I don’t expect it from my own union. You say you want the company to follow the contract but then advocate writing them into compliance when they violate it.
That being said everything has a price. Bringing back voluntary verification and eliminating GFB would just about do it, so maybe we’re not too far apart after all but right now this whole conversation is giving me batch size Deja vu.
Edit: Also what anc said: MEMRAT is a must.