Notices
View Poll Results: What will be the announcement?
New airplane order
58.33%
Pay bonus
4.17%
New routes
16.67%
New logo
12.50%
A1 passes
8.33%
Voters: 120. You may not vote on this poll

Huge AAnnouncement.

Old 04-20-2026 | 12:21 PM
  #131  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 422
Likes: 14
Default

Wrong target all.

Work groups fighting, workers blaming unions….company has everyone right where they want them….

Now both work groups and unions demand…ALL JUMPSEATS PART BOW…..then company does not have everyone where they want them…..

ALL JUMPSEATS ARE INCLUDED IN BOW, THE CREATED PROBLEM, IS GONE

just saying
Reply
Old 04-20-2026 | 05:45 PM
  #132  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 216
Likes: 50
Default

Originally Posted by WiFly
You say this as if you're not part of the union. Union isn't a third party, it's the membership. So go do something about it.
Yeah because we know how that would go:

We want unambiguous contract language.

APA response: well you know that will have unintended consequences so you sure you want that?
Reply
Old 04-20-2026 | 05:53 PM
  #133  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 465
Likes: 56
Default

Originally Posted by drinksonme
I don’t know the circumstances you all referencing, BUT, the NEW FA might not have been wrong…if priority on the non rev list comes into play. Be careful and mindful how you handle this. We lost a grievance….its BS


Sicher Presidential P-21-24 (24-077) (Flight Deck Jumpseat): The grievance was filed on May 22, 2024, protesting the violation of Section 19.C.1. and past practice. APA asserted that Section 19.C.1. was intended to apply exclusively to the flight deck jumpseat and the Company inappropriately expanded its application to include the cabin jumpseat. The System Board denied the grievance based upon the contractual language: “A majority of the Board finds that Section 19(C)(1) is clear and unambiguous, and there is no language in the Agreement that guarantees a pilot the ability to occupy a flight deck jumpseat after considering the taxi fuel burn on a weight restricted flight ahead of a flight attendant who wishes to occupy a cabin jumpseat. … If the Association wanted to ensure that it had priority over any other work group with respect to occupying a jumpseat on the aircraft, then it must negotiate contract language and/or a procedure to guarantee that result. Here, the parties agreed upon contract language that made no change in the boarding priorities or any these affecting the implementation of the benefit obtained in Section 19.C.1. … However, no changes were negotiated to the non-rev boarding procedure which applied to all work groups. … Section 19.C.1. does not alter the boarding priority in the Company’s non-rev policy, and the Board is without authority to rewrite the parties’ Agreement or Company policy to guarantee pilots a priority they did not achieve in bargaining.”
Both instances I’m referring to occurred BEFORE the FDJ grievance ruling. That arbitration ruling is a total and complete joke. I doubt any Captain is going to work out a fuel burn agreement with dispatch to get a CJ on and leave a FDJ behind.
Reply
Old 04-21-2026 | 04:15 AM
  #134  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 443
Likes: 143
Default

Originally Posted by ps2sunvalley
Yeah because we know how that would go:

We want unambiguous contract language.

APA response: well you know that will have unintended consequences so you sure you want that?
Again, you’re talking about the union as if you’re not part of it. Go run for rep or apply to a committee if you want to see change. Everyone here likes to blame others for all the problems. If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.
Reply
Old 04-21-2026 | 04:23 AM
  #135  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Mar 2026
Posts: 142
Likes: 154
Default

Originally Posted by WiFly
Again, you’re talking about the union as if you’re not part of it. Go run for rep or apply to a committee if you want to see change. Everyone here likes to blame others for all the problems. If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.
Is this supposed to be some sort of silencing mechanism to stop people complaining? Do you work for the union?

Do you run for President when you disagree with what they are doing? And don't give me this "volunteer" bull-crap either, our representatives are compensated way more then line pilots apparently. Volunteering is doing something for nothing in return.
Reply
Old 04-21-2026 | 07:04 AM
  #136  
Line Holder
15 Years
On Reserve
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 671
Likes: 11
From: B767 Captain
Default

Originally Posted by drinksonme
Wrong target all.

Work groups fighting, workers blaming unions….company has everyone right where they want them….

Now both work groups and unions demand…ALL JUMPSEATS PART BOW…..then company does not have everyone where they want them…..

ALL JUMPSEATS ARE INCLUDED IN BOW, THE CREATED PROBLEM, IS GONE

just saying
Why would you want to do that? Take a widebody with maybe 5 extra cockpit and flight attendant jump seats. You want to add roughly 1,000 pounds to the BOW every leg, possibly bumping 1,000 pounds of revenue unnecessarily? Or preventing you from carrying another 1,000 pounds of fuel.? Why not just say that weight restrictions won’t affect jumpseaters like United does? That way you only bump the revenue and/or fuel if there are actually jump seaters wanting to get on, not on every flight.
Reply
Old 04-21-2026 | 07:20 AM
  #137  
Beech Dude's Avatar
SrFOorJrCAisthe?
5 Years
 
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 1,618
Likes: 243
Default

Originally Posted by Duckdude
Why would you want to do that? Take a widebody with maybe 5 extra cockpit and flight attendant jump seats. You want to add roughly 1,000 pounds to the BOW every leg, possibly bumping 1,000 pounds of revenue unnecessarily? Or preventing you from carrying another 1,000 pounds of fuel.? Why not just say that weight restrictions won’t affect jumpseaters like United does? That way you only bump the revenue and/or fuel if there are actually jump seaters wanting to get on, not on every flight.
Or at least have just 1 flightdeck JS included
Reply
Old 04-21-2026 | 08:54 AM
  #138  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 75
Default

Originally Posted by CRJCapitan
The whole point is the union is incapable of negotiating contractual language that is legally unambiguous. Would it have been that hard to write "flight deck jumpseat" throughout the paragraph? Making assumptions doesn't cut it. Until we realize we're playing checkers while others are playing chess, we're going to keep losing.
No sane person could foresee another sane person ruling in this manner. Look through my posts. I am(always) extremely critical of APA. I'm giving a pass on this one it's an absolutely WILD ruling.
Reply
Old 04-21-2026 | 09:11 AM
  #139  
On Reserve
 
Joined: May 2023
Posts: 70
Likes: 16
From: Retired ATC
Default

Originally Posted by AAL24
it was the trading cards.
Since AA put the DC3 and 707 out there, too bad they did not continue the history part with others like the DC10, 747, 747SP, and so on. My mother worker for AA in the 60's and 70's - back then it was an amazing airline, even thou Continental had the "pub" on their DC-10's, AA was always the way to go. I miss the old days....
Reply
Old 04-21-2026 | 09:25 AM
  #140  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 422
Likes: 14
Default

Originally Posted by Duckdude
Why would you want to do that? Take a widebody with maybe 5 extra cockpit and flight attendant jump seats. You want to add roughly 1,000 pounds to the BOW every leg, possibly bumping 1,000 pounds of revenue unnecessarily? Or preventing you from carrying another 1,000 pounds of fuel.? Why not just say that weight restrictions won’t affect jumpseaters like United does? That way you only bump the revenue and/or fuel if there are actually jump seaters wanting to get on, not on every flight.

Details…that is fine…let’s get to those on this issue instead of opining and infighting over the actual problem. Solution is there if we could focus as work groups and workers. Company thinks we won’t, so they just enjoy the show


Fine…narrowbody…1 flight deck jumpseat and one CJ will be included in the BOW. Should a situation where a CJ goes unused..then 2 FDJ will be considered as BOW or visa versa.

figure out the Widebody, and still have the taxi fuel option for other jumpseats.

or something along those lines. Again that is the details in the solution.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
HSLD
Major
224
07-18-2007 11:24 AM
FDXFLYR
Cargo
43
04-09-2006 12:30 PM
RockBottom
Major
1
01-06-2006 09:56 PM
nick@FL350
Flight Schools and Training
24
11-08-2005 06:52 PM
Freighter Captain
Cargo
0
06-07-2005 02:51 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices