V,
I think part of the answer is our contract. UPS must decide the numbers first, place them for bid, and we as contract holders expect them to comply. Our contract requires they follow through in many areas. Thus, they can't stuff extra's. Think of the few 744 F/O's they let ride in ANC, IPA threw the flag since they didn't bid those seats out. That's the contract. The seats are open for all to bid, no changing minds at last minute. Actually, I have sympathy for UPS trying to figure out where airplanes need to be in 8 months for changing market conditions. Our contract is pretty specific and pretty binding. Reason some fleets are hectic and chaotic at times. Also, ATL seems to have the abilty to change priorities at the airline via budget changes imposed etc. So it leaves even management guessing sometimes what the best course of action is, but I want them to follow the contract as we all collectively agreed. I am not a big fan of side letters unless not addressed in the contract already. What they can do, is delay the training past the effective date. Contract says 'no problem', paid at new higher rate if applicable. When training slots open, you go. If they change requirments, we all get to rebid. Am sure UPS doesn't like this additional costs either, part market, part contractual, part age 65 on this one. I expect some delayed training on some crews in hopes of avoiding double training costs when the next bid comes out, effectively doing what you suggests