Originally Posted by Lou Stool (Post 4024255)

What's the problem with this? We get to reserve the jumpseat on mainline flights. The three WOs can't reserve the jumpseat, so this is their equivalent, if you want to call it that.

Originally Posted by SoFloFlyer (Post 4024256)

Man, that’s unfortunate. I hope you guys get language that favors including jumpseaters in the BOW.

Flight deck and cabin JS are included in the BOW which is a game changer for a ton of commuters. Can you guys occupy a cabin JS if no FAs list for it?

Originally Posted by RippinClapBombs (Post 4024257)

What’s unfortunate is showing up to the airport not knowing if you’re getting the JS until 15 mins prior to departure. All the extra planning and stress and wasted time at the airport sucks. I hope we get language that favors BOW including jumpseaters but it is extremely rare to have a JS removed from the flight deck, especially with a large Airbus fleet, and it would not be a “game changer”. It should be a very low priority in the next contract negotiations.

Originally Posted by joepilot50 (Post 4024264)

Own metal rules is industry standard and more than fair.

AA pilot gets dibs on mainline JS. Reservable JS or if it went by seniority, no matter how it is handled here at AA, AA pilot gets it. AA pilot could just be a normal D2 pass( not D1W/D2W) with an Envoy pilot listed as a D1 pass, if only the JS is left, AA pilot on D2 gets it.

Envoy should get dibs on Envoy metal.

PSA gets dibs on PSA flight.

Piedmont gets dibs on Piedmont.

But PSA having dibs on Envoy is not an equivalent to our bookable JS because we get our own JS no matter how the JS on mainline is handled.



No the FA's don't want to agree to allow us to occupy any empty cabin JS since they can't occupy the Flight Deck JS.

Originally Posted by joepilot50 (Post 4024120)

We have a mechanism where we can use taxi fuel to account for a jumpseater to get them on, but if an FA checked in first, they get the cabin JS and flight deck JS gets left behind. APA grieved it, but arbitrator made a stupid ruling despite the fact the section of the contract was, " Fuel burn for flight deck jumpseat", but the language in the section itself didn't reference only the flight deck jumpseat.

APA got burned by language again and another item that pits pilots and FA's against each other. Not sure how many CA's will utilize this mechanism if they realize the FA will get the FA JS and the Flight deck JS gets left behind......

It's nice that you guys got the JS's included into the BOW. We need to do the same.

Originally Posted by SoFloFlyer (Post 4024318)

Ahh. Seems like JB is the only one that gives pilots the cabin JS (maybe DL too?).

Originally Posted by HPIC (Post 4024377)

APFA(the AA FA union) actively tells new hire FAs that it’s us…the pilots…that are excluding them from the cockpit JS. It’s DEFINITELY not the FAA! They refuse to consider pilots using FA JS until they are allowed to use cockpit JS.

They also tell the new hire FAs to refuse to allow any cockpit JSer if cabin JSers don’t get on as well. I’ve had a few of the brand, brand new FAs tell us that and push back when all JSers can’t be accommodated on weight restricted flights. It seems they’re being told that “if you don’t agree with it, it can’t happen”…

Management loves the division.

Originally Posted by HPIC (Post 4024377)

APFA(the AA FA union) actively tells new hire FAs that it’s us…the pilots…that are excluding them from the cockpit JS. It’s DEFINITELY not the FAA! They refuse to consider pilots using FA JS until they are allowed to use cockpit JS.

They also tell the new hire FAs to refuse to allow any cockpit JSer if cabin JSers don’t get on as well. I’ve had a few of the brand, brand new FAs tell us that and push back when all JSers can’t be accommodated on weight restricted flights. It seems they’re being told that “if you don’t agree with it, it can’t happen”…

Management loves the division.

Originally Posted by HPIC (Post 4024377)

APFA(the AA FA union) actively tells new hire FAs that it’s us…the pilots…that are excluding them from the cockpit JS. It’s DEFINITELY not the FAA! They refuse to consider pilots using FA JS until they are allowed to use cockpit JS.

They also tell the new hire FAs to refuse to allow any cockpit JSer if cabin JSers don’t get on as well. I’ve had a few of the brand, brand new FAs tell us that and push back when all JSers can’t be accommodated on weight restricted flights. It seems they’re being told that “if you don’t agree with it, it can’t happen”…

Management loves the division.

Originally Posted by HPIC (Post 4024377)

APFA(the AA FA union) actively tells new hire FAs that it’s us…the pilots…that are excluding them from the cockpit JS. It’s DEFINITELY not the FAA! They refuse to consider pilots using FA JS until they are allowed to use cockpit JS.

They also tell the new hire FAs to refuse to allow any cockpit JSer if cabin JSers don’t get on as well. I’ve had a few of the brand, brand new FAs tell us that and push back when all JSers can’t be accommodated on weight restricted flights. It seems they’re being told that “if you don’t agree with it, it can’t happen”…

Management loves the division.

Originally Posted by FutureMajor8 (Post 4024819)

Some CAs need to grow some balls and make it known who is in charge.