gearhorn

The union has been asking for our input as to what we want in the next contract. Here's what I've sent my rep so far. Sorry for the length but there's a lot I think can be improved beyond just pay rate and other obvious "big-ticket" items.
If you think these ideas are stupid, I'm sure I'll hear it. But hopefully this will generate some more ideas of what we can have the union negotiate for. A lot of us came from other airlines and many, if not most, of my ideas are from other contracts that I'd like to see incorporated into ours. I go by the philosophy if don't ask for it, you can't get it.

Some of my thoughts on what we should be negotiating for.

DON'T touch vacation.

DON'T change the retirement age. Keep age 60. Try to remove the penalties for retiring early. Once you have 25 years, I think you should be able to leave with your retirement.

Remove 4a2b from the contract. That is just a horrific oversight that it was left in there with such weak language. Take it out.

Reserve days should be a daily guarantee, not a monthly guarantee. The least amount the day can be worth should be 4:30. It can be worth more using the 96% formula we currently use.

At least 50% of the MEM reserve pilots should be on a 3 hour report time. I understand the company wants guys on 1.5 reports but they don't need everybody on that short of notice. Have they ever had to call in the entire reserve staff on 1.5 hours notice? Create a short call (1.5 hour), medium call (3 hour), long call (24 hour) system of reserve.

The attitude of "if you're on reserve you chose to be there" from the union needs to go. ALL dues paying members deserve an increase in their QOL. And my reasoning for putting some effort into the reserve rules this time around is that it helps everybody, not just the reserve guys. If reserve is palatable to local MEM (or where ever) guys, they will bid for it and free up other lines for us commuters. With a 3 hour call out some guys can live in Nashville, I'm sure many will, and free up that many more lines. But by having reserve be an only in Memphis, only on short call thing it's forced on either super-local guys or the super-junior guys.

Leave the 3 hour reports for LAX, ANC, HKG, ect. Don't give anything up.

DON'T allow pref. bidding. Keep the current system for line holders.

VTO's need to be built differently. Right now there is no consistency with how requests are processed. I do NOT want pref. bidding for line holders but we can learn a lesson from how pref. bidding is done. VTO building is essentially pref. bidding except we're allowing the company to do it by hand rather than controlling it ourselves. We need to get the pref. bidding software and use that for building our VTO's. (all though you might want to call it something different to avoid guys freaking out) But we also need to take lessons from how it's been implemented at other carriers. When the company controls the process with no union oversight (Comair), it's a disaster. But when the SIG (or whomever) gets heavy, heavy input into the process it can go reasonably well (NWA). Or so I've heard. We have too many pilots who are forced into VTO's and this will improve their QOL.

Not being allowed to deviate on the first leg of a two leg dead head needs to be changed. i.e. Trip deadheads MEM-EWR Sunday night then deadheads EWR-XXX Monday night. Right now you can't cancel the MEM-EWR leg without losing the EWR-XXX leg even if the flights are on two separate carriers with two separate record locator numbers due to "system limitations" (an ACP's words, not mine). This is basic travel agent stuff so I don't believe it for a second. But I think that since it's not addressed in the contract they're saying it's a "system limitation" so they don't have to deal with it.

Expense reports should go from a monthly report to at least a quarterly report. Very frustrating when I save them $1,500 one month only to get charged $250 the next because I was in the next month.

Disputed pairings. Something needs to change but, unfortunately, I don't have a good answer. The current system doesn't work and we need to save ourselves from ourselves. We'll never win the process of disputing a pairing with such a large base (MEM) in which guys are anonymous and can pick them up. Maybe an arbitrator or a "reserves only" fly the disputed pairings?

Trip trades need to be processed in real time, without human intervention. Or at least have counters next to each trip that tell us how many guys are trying to all ready pick up a trip. Too much of the crew force is glued to their computers trying to increase their time at home by grabbing trips as they come out. I put in hundreds of trip trades per month with a very low percentage being successful. Mostly due to "earlier time stamp." When a trip languishes in open time for 20 min. plus, a bunch of us try to trade into something we had no chance of getting. HUGE waste of time. The excuse of "it's a software problem" is a joke. At a company as technologically sophisticated as this one, that excuse should never fly....it can be done.

If the company doesn't want to print out bidpacks, have them buy BidX and distribute to all the pilots for free. Then buy the developer of BidX a beer with union money. He deserves it.

Tuition reimbursement in a FDA. I would like to see this but not at the expense of our other members. Meaning, if the union goes after a reimbursement package so pilots can send their kids to English schools while overseas, great. But the problem then becomes how do we make it equal for all the pilots over there. If pilot A has the company paying for his ten kids to go to school while pilot B is single or even married with no kids, pilot A has a huge increase in his compensation package that pilot B doesn't get due to personal decisions or even medical reasons. Go ahead and negotiate a more palatable package for the guys to sent their kids to school but make it a "foreign living incentive" and explain it to the pilot force that it's so pilot A can send his kids to school without giving a different compensation package to pilot B who is in the same seat, equipment and same base.

Denied drop trip requests should then be offered up to the rest of the crew force. So if pilot A can't drop his trip it still goes into open time (maybe with a star or something next to it) for pilot B to pick up. i.e. I live in Minneapolis and see some Minneapolis trips in open time on my week off that pilot A can't get rid of. I could then pick them up and he gets the time off.
This way we can "help ourselves" improve our schedules and it doesn't cost the company anything.

The ability to divide a trip, mid-trip, for somebody else to bump or pick up. Somebody told me that UPS has a system like this. As I understand it, another crew member could PDO bump somebody for just a single leg. Or even let the guy bump him for pay. I can envision plenty of scenarios where a guy would love to give up his last inbound leg to Memphis in order to commute home earlier (weekend layovers, west coast guys, ect.)

I've heard guys talking about monthly caps on our hours. I am NOT in favor of this. One of the best things about this airline is that I can work my butt off one month and then take extra time off the next. Or work hard in the spring to take most of the summer off (which I do). If we were to go to a cap system, that would restrict my ability to manage my schedule. The minimum that I would take if the majority of guys wanted a cap system would be a 6 month cap.

Auto-trip trades. This would be a computer intensive idea but I think it's a viable possibility to increase our QOL. I'll use the "standard" Boeing trip as an example. If pilot A has alternating SBN-BOI-SBN all week long and lives in SBN, I'm sure he's interested in swapping out his BOI day for SBN layovers or even any layover with a shorter flight than BOI if it were to pay the same. If we had a system that would let him auto-trade into a SBN trip that came up on the same day as his BOI trip or even a preference for any trip that pays the same and has the same footprint.
So in order to do that he would go into VIPS and put in an "Auto-trade." He would have to specify what trip he's willing to give away (BOI and the dates) and then what type of trips he would accept if they were to show up in open time. So when another guy drops his ATW trip that has the same footprint, his week would then get changed to SBN-ATW-SBN. Then if at a later date a SBN layover pops into open time he would be autotraded into SBN-SBN-SBN.
For the "Boeing example" I think it would be very clear and simple to implement this type of system. Where it would become more complicated is when guys have longer trips with more variables. i.e. international, dead-heads, ect. But this system could keep half of our crew force from being glued to the computer trying to swap out their junk trips for something better/more livable.
Again, another solution to improve our QOL with minimal costs (just the programming time).

I'd like to see a web-based, "pass system" for our reserves. I know some of the legacy carriers had a phone based system like this during their prime (USAirways is the one I'm familiar with) but I also understand how time consuming and slightly impractical it can be with a large number of reserves. The way I envision it, a reserve pilot would put in his/her preferences for the month for trips they would like to fly.....international vs. domestic, certain cities, DH's, long vs. short, ect. on VIPS. Then when a trip needs to go to a reserve pilot, if it meets somebody's criteria it would notify the scheduler and that pilot would be assigned the trip first. If it didn't meet anybody's criteria then it would be assigned in the same manner in which we use today. Essentially, this is an enhanced "first fly" system. As a commuter, I've seen trips get assigned to other pilots that layover in my hometown. More than likely, that pilot could care less if he flies to Chicago, Dallas or Atlanta. If there was a system in place in which I could volunteer for specific trips, it could increase my time at home while not costing the company a dime (except for programming time).