Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




AcePilot55
09-18-2017, 11:20 AM
I would like to request a copy of SkyWest contract. Thank you.


Mercyful Fate
09-18-2017, 11:29 AM
I would like to request a copy of SkyWest contract. Thank you.
http://replygif.net/i/1472.gif

RemoveB4Flight
09-18-2017, 11:30 AM
Skywest doesn't have a contract


WesternSkies
09-18-2017, 12:12 PM
Done .

hawk21
09-18-2017, 12:46 PM
What? :confused:

AcePilot55
09-19-2017, 07:58 AM
...work rules agreement or equivalent.

AcePilot55
09-19-2017, 07:59 AM
...SkyWest work rules agreement or equivalent.

Nevjets
09-19-2017, 10:11 AM
Good luck with that. These guys are tight with that information.

Blackwing
09-20-2017, 10:39 PM
I would like to request a copy of SkyWest contract. Thank you.
Who are you and why do you want this information?

AcePilot55
09-21-2017, 11:04 AM
Senior Horizon Air pilot; interest in pilot representation organization, workgroup and management relations, construction of work agreements and labor contracts, regional pilot compensation levels.

blockplus
09-22-2017, 12:20 PM
Its like asking a Mormon where to buy magic underpants. Pretty tight lippdled unless you have a members card.

SirLurksalot
09-30-2017, 08:49 PM
Its like asking a Mormon where to buy magic underpants. Pretty tight lippdled unless you have a members card.

Why, because its abysmal and embarrassing?

AboveMins
10-01-2017, 05:22 PM
Why, because its abysmal and embarrassing?

Only if you refuse to partake in the Kool-Aid.

gojo
10-08-2017, 04:28 PM
Only if you refuse to partake in the Kool-Aid.

I don't get it. If you do the math one can see that Skywest pay and work rules are behind what their union counterparts are. 2% dues and you'd still be money ahead. Why the strong anti sentiment against them? A comparison of the Skywest of even a few years ago to present shows a trend. And now locked into a near industry low pay scale for 5 years? What gives?

rickair7777
10-08-2017, 04:42 PM
I don't get it. If you do the math one can see that Skywest pay and work rules are behind what their union counterparts are. 2% dues and you'd still be money ahead. Why the strong anti sentiment against them? A comparison of the Skywest of even a few years ago to present shows a trend. And now locked into a near industry low pay scale for 5 years? What gives?

Several reasons.

The UT demographic is not big on unions in general, for better or worse.

At least 1/3 of the pilots came from union regionals and are permanently scarred. If their last regional sucked, or was a dead-end, even if it's not the union's fault that still leaves a bad taste in your mouth (someone taking your money but not fixing the problem).

The west coast surfer demographic is not big on unions either. While not as vehement as the UT boyz, the west coast guys did not grow up in the union-heavy societies of the mid-west and eastern seaboard where everybody's dad was either in the union, the mob, or both. It's alien to them.

Frankly SKW never really needed a union in the past. QOL deterioration may be changing that. The company has apparently decided to run lean as SOP.

gojo
10-08-2017, 04:57 PM
Several reasons.

The UT demographic is not big on unions in general, for better or worse.

At least 1/3 of the pilots came from union regionals and are permanently scarred. If their last regional sucked, or was a dead-end, even if it's not the union's fault that still leaves a bad taste in your mouth (someone taking your money but not fixing the problem).

The west coast surfer demographic is not big on unions either. While not as vehement as the UT boyz, the west coast guys did not grow up in the union-heavy societies of the mid-west and eastern seaboard where everybody's dad was either in the union, the mob, or both. It's alien to them.

Frankly SKW never really needed a union in the past. QOL deterioration may be changing that. The company has apparently decided to run lean as SOP.

I appreciate your well thought out answer. It still leaves me shaking my head though. Money is money. And it almost seems like the peverbial cut your nose off to spite your face? At some point, unless you're a lifer you'll pay dues at a major. And yes I know ALPA at the major level is not the same. But a 5% net gain, just for a number can add up to a lot.

amcnd
10-08-2017, 05:19 PM
Realy alpa would have to get us a 8+% raise to realy make it worth while. But reality is they may get us 2% raise. But we then pay them 1.95%. Unless they guarantee us Endeavor pay scales in under 6 months. I doubt they will get voted in... Everyone knows how long it will tak to get a contract... just look at some of the past negotiations..

Colt45
10-08-2017, 05:35 PM
What a bunch of bull****.... I can't believe how I continue to read this ****.. Day after day, no matter my location in the world, I turn on the APC TV to view what's going on with a bunch of mediocre/*****y pilots... I could give two ****s less about how socially inept you are, but here I am, reading your bull****.. I guess at the end of the day, I'm just a big ****ing looser..

amcnd
10-08-2017, 06:53 PM
Its been the same for 20 years.. (well flightinfo.com before here). Nothing will change...

word302
10-08-2017, 07:08 PM
What a bunch of bull****.... I can't believe how I continue to read this ****.. Day after day, no matter my location in the world, I turn on the APC TV to view what's going on with a bunch of mediocre/*****y pilots... I could give two ****s less about how socially inept you are, but here I am, reading your bull****.. I guess at the end of the day, I'm just a big ****ing looser..

A little early to be this sauced isn’t it?

RemoveB4Flight
10-08-2017, 07:19 PM
Realy alpa would have to get us a 8+% raise to realy make it worth while. But reality is they may get us 2% raise. But we then pay them 1.95%. Unless they guarantee us Endeavor pay scales in under 6 months. I doubt they will get voted in... Everyone knows how long it will tak to get a contract... just look at some of the past negotiations..

Why would we have to get an 8+% raise to make it worthwhile? If they cost us 1.95% and get us 2% isn't that better than we have now?

NewGuy01
10-08-2017, 09:08 PM
A little early to be this sauced isn’t it?



Yeah I'm gonna have to go with no

*burp


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jonneaux
10-09-2017, 08:47 AM
I appreciate your well thought out answer. It still leaves me shaking my head though. Money is money. And it almost seems like the peverbial cut your nose off to spite your face? At some point, unless you're a lifer you'll pay dues at a major. And yes I know ALPA at the major level is not the same. But a 5% net gain, just for a number can add up to a lot.

It comes down to this. The QOL at SkyWest is far better than at pretty much any other regional. Most people here are happy. Yes, we have our problems, so does everyone. The worst dumpster fires in the industry have unions, therefor, the notion that having a union will solve our problems is clearly absurd. If I have a problem, I can call my Chief and sort it out. I don't need to go through the Union, file a greivance and wait months or years to get an answer.

You have a legally binding contract? Great! When the company violates the contract you have a legal basis for a lengthy lawsuit that you still may not win. Most of the time we are able to work things out informally, though certainly not always.

As for pay? When you compare W2s at the end of the year we make more than most. It has been suggested that to come up with an apples to apples basis for comparison of pay, divide gross earnings by total block. For me, year 18, that works out to over $206/ hr. My pay rate is $115. Now do you see how simply comparing rates is meaningless?

That's not drinking Kool Aid, that's sipping Bourbon.

TonyC
10-09-2017, 09:39 AM
It has been suggested that to come up with an apples to apples basis for comparison of pay, divide gross earnings by total block. For me, year 18, that works out to over $206/ hr. My pay rate is $115. Now do you see how simply comparing rates is meaningless?

That's not drinking Kool Aid, that's sipping Bourbon.




Actually, that's smoking some good drugs.


Do you think you're not working unless you're blocking?


By that metric, I imagine I have colleagues with pay rates in excess of $1,500 per block hour or more. If that's how you need to slice it to make yourself feel good, dream away. Delusions are free.






.

Nevjets
10-09-2017, 10:40 AM
Realy alpa would have to get us a 8+% raise to realy make it worth while. But reality is they may get us 2% raise. But we then pay them 1.95%. Unless they guarantee us Endeavor pay scales in under 6 months. I doubt they will get voted in... Everyone knows how long it will tak to get a contract... just look at some of the past negotiations..


It's actually 1.9% and it's tax deductible. So your effective dues rate may be lower. But more importantly, a union is more than just a contract. Those dues monies do a lot more than get you a contract.

Mercyful Fate
10-09-2017, 10:43 AM
It's actually 1.9% and it's tax deductible. So your effective dues rate may be lower. But more importantly, a union is more than just a contract. Those dues monies do a lot more than get you a contract.

What, like keeping your airline from vanishing? Oh wait....

Nevjets
10-09-2017, 01:44 PM
What, like keeping your airline from vanishing? Oh wait....


Inc, who is the only one responsible for that, is doing a great job at that already. Try again.

word302
10-09-2017, 02:20 PM
It comes down to this. The QOL at SkyWest is far better than at pretty much any other regional. Most people here are happy. Yes, we have our problems, so does everyone. The worst dumpster fires in the industry have unions, therefor, the notion that having a union will solve our problems is clearly absurd. If I have a problem, I can call my Chief and sort it out. I don't need to go through the Union, file a greivance and wait months or years to get an answer.

You have a legally binding contract? Great! When the company violates the contract you have a legal basis for a lengthy lawsuit that you still may not win. Most of the time we are able to work things out informally, though certainly not always.

As for pay? When you compare W2s at the end of the year we make more than most. It has been suggested that to come up with an apples to apples basis for comparison of pay, divide gross earnings by total block. For me, year 18, that works out to over $206/ hr. My pay rate is $115. Now do you see how simply comparing rates is meaningless?

That's not drinking Kool Aid, that's sipping Bourbon.

I love how you fail to include your LCA override. You should join SAPA. Your math skills would be appreciated.

Mercyful Fate
10-09-2017, 02:24 PM
Inc, who is the only one responsible for that, is doing a great job at that already. Try again.

Exactly, and the union can't do a thing about it. What part of that did you not understand?

Nevjets
10-09-2017, 02:27 PM
It comes down to this. The QOL at SkyWest is far better than at pretty much any other regional. Most people here are happy. Yes, we have our problems, so does everyone. The worst dumpster fires in the industry have unions, therefor, the notion that having a union will solve our problems is clearly absurd. If I have a problem, I can call my Chief and sort it out. I don't need to go through the Union, file a greivance and wait months or years to get an answer.

You have a legally binding contract? Great! When the company violates the contract you have a legal basis for a lengthy lawsuit that you still may not win. Most of the time we are able to work things out informally, though certainly not always.

As for pay? When you compare W2s at the end of the year we make more than most. It has been suggested that to come up with an apples to apples basis for comparison of pay, divide gross earnings by total block. For me, year 18, that works out to over $206/ hr. My pay rate is $115. Now do you see how simply comparing rates is meaningless?

That's not drinking Kool Aid, that's sipping Bourbon.


The QOL at regionals varies greatly depending on upgrade times. So Skywest isn't the only one with good QOL. But pilots cannot control that. The only thing they can control, if they have a union, is any QOL items they negotiate. So when upgrade times are not less than 3 years, you can still have some QOL.

Next, the notion that since worst places ha e unions, therefore unions are bad is just faulty logic. I don't need to go any further to explain logic. And like I've said before, a pilot union is so much more than just a contract.

Next, it's great you can call your Cheif pilot and get things fixed or straightened out to your liking. Guess what? That is also required at a union airline. It's called self-help. The difference being that when your Cheif pilot, or scheduling supervisor, or payroll analyst, etc, disagree with you, the union pilot with his legally binding contract has another avenue to deal with it. Many many items in MOUs, LOAs, letters, etc come from settlements that come from these grievances. Most of them are settled on an individual basis which would have never happened without having that avenue that management is required to comply with. In my personal experience and from taking to others, personal grievances take a few weeks. When it's something systemic that affects the pilot group as a whole, it takes months. And that's when the contract is amended. Which brings up my last point on this, you may get your issue resolved individually but if it's a systemic problem, others will have to deal with that issue as well instead of it getting fixed for everyone.

Next, the legally binding contract is not a basis for lawsuits. The contract has a dispute resolution section. You go through the internal process that gets escalated through the three steps. And if there isn't a settlement, the issue is arbitrated by a neutral third party. That is very rare depending on how hostile your management is and yours isn't. In my experience, there's one arbitration about every two years, that includes 7 years under Inc management. So when you say you don't always work things out, when you have a contract, you get another choice.

Lastly, you may feel that your effective pay rate is impressive, but it's not. If it doesn't get close to double of your pay rate, it's not that good. For example, last year, mine was $179 whereas my rate was about $87. This is for half at 11 year pay and half at 12 year pay.

gojo
10-10-2017, 08:40 AM
What, like keeping your airline from vanishing? Oh wait....

Umm, how about working to create KCM which Skywest gets to enjoy? Or how about working to keep foreign carriers from doing domestic routes? These are just two things that dues money works for at the national level which Skywest pilots feel they're too good to contribute

rickair7777
10-10-2017, 11:34 AM
MOD INPUT: No insults or flamebait allowed. We're already on thin ice with a union thread started by a non-SKW pilot in the SKW forum.

Keep civil or it's getting closed. Thanks.

rickair7777
10-10-2017, 11:36 AM
Umm, how about working to create KCM which Skywest gets to enjoy? Or how about working to keep foreign carriers from doing domestic routes? These are just two things that dues money works for at the national level which Skywest pilots feel they're too good to contribute


Which SKW pilots? The ones who voted yes in 2006? The ones who came from alpa carriers?

Why hasn't there been a drive in 10+ years? I know there are people interested...

amcnd
10-10-2017, 01:07 PM
Which SKW pilots? The ones who voted yes in 2006? The ones who came from alpa carriers?

Why hasn't there been a drive in 10+ years? I know there are people interested...

Maybe people interested on this forum board... but even that guys pushing the 2006 petition are not even interested anymore... i never hear a peep about alpa when im out flying from anyone...

TonyC
10-10-2017, 01:55 PM
Which SKW pilots? The ones who voted yes in 2006? The ones who came from alpa carriers?

Why hasn't there been a drive in 10+ years? I know there are people interested...




Point of fact, I believe the last vote was November 6, 2007. Not quite 10 years.


Why not since then?


I spent a lot of time back then talking to pilots in SLC. My MEC Chairman and I, invited to visit the crew room by a SkyWest pilot, were asked to leave by a management stooge because "St. George was watching, and didn't like us being there."

How did you help that organizing drive?

It's a unique culture. It reminds me of another "culture" typically associated with Utah.






.

rickair7777
10-10-2017, 02:09 PM
I spent a lot of time back then talking to pilots in SLC. My MEC Chairman and I, invited to visit the crew room by a SkyWest pilot, were asked to leave by a management stooge because "St. George was watching, and didn't like us being there."

That crew room is in a secure area. Whatever their motives, they are within their rights to ban non-employees. Labor organization rights do not grant carte blanche to non-employees. There were OAL alpa reps at a variety of functions in SLC, BBQ's, etc. No lack of opportunity to talk to them.


How did you help that organizing drive?


On probation & commuting to reserve, and doing a lot of OCONUS military duty. While I voted yes, I do not have a religious affinity for alpa so what little time off I had I spent with my family. No regrets there.

Trying to guilt-trip people about support/participation/dues is counter-productive

TonyC
10-10-2017, 09:56 PM
That crew room is in a secure area. Whatever their motives, they are within their rights to ban non-employees.




Not my point, and we gladly complied with the request. My point was, even in the crew room in SLC, "St. George is watching."






.

Nevjets
10-11-2017, 11:15 AM
Which SKW pilots? The ones who voted yes in 2006? The ones who came from alpa carriers?

Why hasn't there been a drive in 10+ years? I know there are people interested...


Yeah, the 65% of the 2500 pilots you had back then that didn't vote.;). There is probably only a small percentage of pilots on the seniority list now above the 11/07 date that voted yes at this point. But nothing stops current pilots from organizing.

word302
10-11-2017, 12:05 PM
Yeah, the 65% of the 2500 pilots you had back then that didn't vote.;). There is probably only a small percentage of pilots on the seniority list now above the 11/07 date that voted yes at this point. But nothing stops current pilots from organizing.

It has already begun.

rickair7777
10-11-2017, 03:33 PM
Yeah, the 65% of the 2500 pilots you had back then that didn't vote.;). There is probably only a small percentage of pilots on the seniority list now above the 11/07 date that voted yes at this point. But nothing stops current pilots from organizing.

Don't mislead people (why am I surprised)... in 2007 a ballot not cast was a no vote. That rule had since changed but back then most non voters were intentional no voters.

Apokleros
10-12-2017, 05:15 AM
ALPA doesn't do jack for regionals.

Nevjets
10-12-2017, 10:27 AM
Don't mislead people (why am I surprised)... in 2007 a ballot not cast was a no vote. That rule had since changed but back then most non voters were intentional no voters.


That's EXACTLY why I specifically said pilots that didn't vote. Not voting was the same as a NO vote. How many of the 65% of pilots in 2007 that didn't vote still remain? My guess, not that many. And that was my point. Sorry you misunderstood (not surprised).

gojo
10-12-2017, 10:27 AM
ALPA doesn't do jack for regionals.

I disagree. Saying that they don't do jack for the regionals is being very short sighted and naive. Alpa national does a lot for the industry in general and the regionals also benefit from that. NAI is a huge example of something that's done at the national level. And Skywest like many other regionals benefit from that. You all just feel you should get it for free

Nevjets
10-12-2017, 10:29 AM
ALPA doesn't do jack for regionals.


ALPA does exactly the same for regionals that they do for mainline. Just because they don't have as much leverage, doesn't mean they don't do anything. And once again, a pilot union is a lot more than just a contract. It's like number three in the importance level of a pilot union.

Paid2fly
10-12-2017, 08:51 PM
Don't mislead people (why am I surprised)... in 2007 a ballot not cast was a no vote. That rule had since changed but back then most non voters were intentional no voters.






There are a lot of apathetic crew members that just couldn't be bothered to get informed, involved, or lift a finger to vote one way or another.

Duesenflieger
10-13-2017, 02:31 PM
ALPA doesn't do jack for regionals.


For what it's worth, at least ALPA representatives would be standing up for us to some degree, even if ALPA's leverage is small. Can you say the same for our student council in SAPA? I think that you also underestimate how ineffective ALPA can be at mainline and LCCs as well. Just look at what mainline/LCC pilots endured/are enduring now in order to secure better work rules and compensation. It isn't a matter of ALPA "not doing jack", rather it is the balance of power between unions and management that makes it look like ALPA is ineffective at the regional level...and management will always have power over unions and employees.

Mercyful Fate
10-14-2017, 07:06 AM
For what it's worth, at least ALPA representatives would be standing up for us to some degree, even if ALPA's leverage is small. Can you say the same for our student council in SAPA? I think that you also underestimate how ineffective ALPA can be at mainline and LCCs as well. Just look at what mainline/LCC pilots endured/are enduring now in order to secure better work rules and compensation. It isn't a matter of ALPA "not doing jack", rather it is the balance of power between unions and management that makes it look like ALPA is ineffective at the regional level...and management will always have power over unions and employees.

So throwing your hard earned money down the tubes for a group that is just, meh willing to stand up for you "to some degree" is a sound investment idea for you? Your SAPA group at least is not taking money from you to be ineffective as you say.

Mercyful Fate
10-14-2017, 07:09 AM
ALPA does exactly the same for regionals that they do for mainline. Just because they don't have as much leverage, doesn't mean they don't do anything. And once again, a pilot union is a lot more than just a contract. It's like number three in the importance level of a pilot union.

Only thing they do the same for regionals as the majors is collect money. Stops right there.

rickair7777
10-14-2017, 09:25 AM
There are a lot of apathetic crew members that just couldn't be bothered to get informed, involved, or lift a finger to vote one way or another.


There are for sure, but in 2006 the vast majority on the non-votes were actually intentional no votes.

I would have preferred if the no voters actually cast a ballot, to avoid ambiguity but that's irrelevant today... if it happened today, you'd have to cast a ballot if you wanted to be counted, either way.

RemoveB4Flight
10-14-2017, 01:46 PM
If put to a vote today, I would be very surprised to see it voted down.
If passed, the company/management would have no one to blame but themselves.

word302
10-14-2017, 02:55 PM
If put to a vote today, I would be very surprised to see it voted down.
If passed, the company/management would have no one to blame but themselves.

After this last vote I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see it fail. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try.

CBreezy
10-15-2017, 01:34 PM
So throwing your hard earned money down the tubes for a group that is just, meh willing to stand up for you "to some degree" is a sound investment idea for you? Your SAPA group at least is not taking money from you to be ineffective as you say.

Which regionals have the highest pay and defined career paths? Do those regionals have unions? Do you think Skywest would match Endeavor TA out of the goodness of their heart? What happens if you are paid incorrectly even after filling a complaint?

Don't confuse the cartwheels management has to do to keep your pilot group happy as good will. They do it for the sole purpose of keeping a union off property because they know it would significantly cost them.

snackysmores
10-15-2017, 01:45 PM
After Endeavor passes their TA just start leaving union drive leaflets inside Mormon HQ and you will get a big raise the following week. Guaranteed.

Apokleros
10-15-2017, 02:02 PM
We don't want your union. We are very happy with our airline just the way it is Capeesh? You liberals think that you can mutate society into a debased pipedream of false delusions.

CBreezy
10-15-2017, 02:30 PM
We don't want your union. We are very happy with our airline just the way it is Capeesh? You liberals think that you can mutate society into a debased pipedream of false delusions.

Whoa there Rand Paul. This isn't a liberal or conservative subject.

But, as an FYI, the middle class and our economy was strongest during the periods of highest unionization. Wages account for the lowest % of GDP and corporate revenue since the end it WW2. Since 2001, the only 1st world countries in North America and Europe that have seen a decline in that ratio are us, Ireland, Greece and Spain. Want to take a guess how those economies are doing?

And, by the way, you're welcome. A sector that has at least a 25% unionization, non-union workers in that industry earns a 7.5% higher wage.

RemoveB4Flight
10-15-2017, 02:30 PM
We don't want your union. We are very happy with our airline just the way it is Capeesh? You liberals think that you can mutate society into a debased pipedream of false delusions.

Who's we? Do you have a mouse in your pocket?

word302
10-15-2017, 03:28 PM
We don't want your union. We are very happy with our airline just the way it is Capeesh? You liberals think that you can mutate society into a debased pipedream of false delusions.
Uh. Speak for yourself.

Duesenflieger
10-15-2017, 03:49 PM
We don't want your union. We are very happy with our airline just the way it is Capeesh? You liberals think that you can mutate society into a debased pipedream of false delusions.


I disagree. There is already an ALPA organizational movement in progress. Time will tell whether it blooms, but with QOL slipping and our pay lagging behind, it may gain traction.

Duesenflieger
10-15-2017, 04:01 PM
So throwing your hard earned money down the tubes for a group that is just, meh willing to stand up for you "to some degree" is a sound investment idea for you? Your SAPA group at least is not taking money from you to be ineffective as you say.


I'll humor you this once.


Having a union is an insurance policy to have in place and just one of many costs of doing business in the airline industry. It is for a reason that SkyWest management attempts to keep unions off property--they would be a newfound hindrance and would cost the airline.


The balance of power will always lie in management's hands, so ALPA can only do so much for us. Regional airline management is constrained by what it can offer, so it would seem that most regional unions are ineffective. I can understand the gripe of those of us who hail from previous ALPA-affiliated regionals.


A real, legit union would be far better for us than a company-sponsored group that has been accused by many pilots to censor anti-management sentiment. Mine and others' recent experience with SAPA as it regards the recent TA put a bad taste in my mouth--they weren't fighting for us, they were doing whatever they could to protect management's best interests. My personal view at least.


You as an "investor" don't want us to unionize because it would lower the value of SKYW stock. You are not looking out for the SkyWest pilot group's best interests, though. In fact, I doubt that you are an investor at all. You are most likely just trolling us for entertainment, ha.

WesternSkies
10-15-2017, 06:23 PM
We don't want your union. We are very happy with our airline just the way it is Capeesh? You liberals think that you can mutate society into a debased pipedream of false delusions.

Cue Rex Tillerson.

Paid2fly
10-15-2017, 10:51 PM
We don't want your union. We are very happy with our airline just the way it is Capeesh? You liberals think that you can mutate society into a debased pipedream of false delusions.











Nope, try again!

Mercyful Fate
10-16-2017, 06:32 AM
I'll humor you this once.


Having a union is an insurance policy to have in place and just one of many costs of doing business in the airline industry. It is for a reason that SkyWest management attempts to keep unions off property--they would be a newfound hindrance and would cost the airline.


The balance of power will always lie in management's hands, so ALPA can only do so much for us. Regional airline management is constrained by what it can offer, so it would seem that most regional unions are ineffective. I can understand the gripe of those of us who hail from previous ALPA-affiliated regionals.


A real, legit union would be far better for us than a company-sponsored group that has been accused by many pilots to censor anti-management sentiment. Mine and others' recent experience with SAPA as it regards the recent TA put a bad taste in my mouth--they weren't fighting for us, they were doing whatever they could to protect management's best interests. My personal view at least.


You as an "investor" don't want us to unionize because it would lower the value of SKYW stock. You are not looking out for the SkyWest pilot group's best interests, though. In fact, I doubt that you are an investor at all. You are most likely just trolling us for entertainment, ha.


I guarantee you hold more leverage now without a union than you would with one. The fear of the union from your management forces them to try their best to keep a balance of power. You throw a union into the mix and it is game over. Not only do you drive that wedge between your management, the rest of your airline will be forced to unionize. Then you force the risk of other departments taking things to an extreme with their work rules that could jeopardize pilot jobs.

As far as saying me not looking out for pilots best interest, that could not be further from the truth. Problem is you don't think outside of the box, evaluating the fallout on a larger scale. I could go ad infinitum about what those things are, but what good would it do? It is like telling a kid not to touch the fire because it will burn you in the long run, but the kid knows better and does it anyway.

I am curious, what in your mind would be some of the bad things a union would bring?

Mercyful Fate
10-16-2017, 07:13 AM
After Endeavor passes their TA just start leaving union drive leaflets inside Mormon HQ and you will get a big raise the following week. Guaranteed.

Exactly how many pilots wander the halls of HQ?

RemoveB4Flight
10-16-2017, 07:52 AM
I guarantee you hold more leverage now without a union than you would with one. The fear of the union from your management forces them to try their best to keep a balance of power. You throw a union into the mix and it is game over. Not only do you drive that wedge between your management, the rest of your airline will be forced to unionize. Then you force the risk of other departments taking things to an extreme with their work rules that could jeopardize pilot jobs.

As far as saying me not looking out for pilots best interest, that could not be further from the truth. Problem is you don't think outside of the box, evaluating the fallout on a larger scale. I could go ad infinitum about what those things are, but what good would it do? It is like telling a kid not to touch the fire because it will burn you in the long run, but the kid knows better and does it anyway.

I am curious, what in your mind would be some of the bad things a union would bring?

1% in today's market proved we have no leverage without a union. Even worse is the company's constant disregard for the policy and no protections when they decide to reinterpret the rules to fit their needs each day.
I've never been big on needing/wanting a union myself but times are changing.

Mercyful Fate
10-16-2017, 08:00 AM
1% in today's market proved we have no leverage without a union. Even worse is the company's constant disregard for the policy and no protections when they decide to reinterpret the rules to fit their needs each day.
I've never been big on needing/wanting a union myself but times are changing.

So, are there documented and confirmed violations of the rules? And if so, when your management was confronted on those violations, what was the result?

sn00p
10-16-2017, 08:01 AM
1% in today's market proved we have no leverage without a union. Even worse is the company's constant disregard for the policy and no protections when they decide to reinterpret the rules to fit their needs each day.
I've never been big on needing/wanting a union myself but times are changing.

Completely agree.

It’s disappointing when it is in black and white and the company still interprets the rules incorrectly.

Mercyful Fate
10-16-2017, 08:31 AM
Completely agree.

It’s disappointing when it is in black and white and the company still interprets the rules incorrectly.

Company rules? FAR's?

RemoveB4Flight
10-16-2017, 09:42 AM
So, are there documented and confirmed violations of the rules? And if so, when your management was confronted on those violations, what was the result?

Yes there are. SAPA regularly has updates on instances of the company pulling a new stunt and the details of the uphill battle of them trying to fix it. Sometimes they are successful sometimes they are not..even with things that are in clear violation of the policy.
Some are so obvious you would think I am joking. A recent one was forcing pilots to work on their day off. After several months of discussion and meetings with the company it was decided that a day off is....a day off. Imagine that.
That shouldn't have taken so long. The problem is in an instance where crew support forces you to work on a day off you, you call to SAPA and the response would be to fly the flight and submit a complaint about it. Meanwhile you've already missed your child's birthday party or you had to call in emergency (for a day that was already a day off).
It's sad that SAPA doesn't have enough power to even say "No, that's a breach of policy. You don't have to work that day because it's your day off. We will take care of you"
Wait for the best part.. even though it has been agreed that days off are protected, we haven't seen the last of this problem yet. I'm sure it will come up again in a few months or a year and they will have more meetings to redetermine how they want to interpret the rules.

So I guess my point is that I agree with you completely that the fact that the company doesn't want a union should be enough to keep them playing ball and when that happens everyone wins. But what is the next course of action when the company decides not to play nicely anymore? What if the employees have decided that the current system isn't working anymore?

Mercyful Fate
10-16-2017, 09:51 AM
Yes there are. SAPA regularly has updates on instances of the company pulling a new stunt and the details of the uphill battle of them trying to fix it. Sometimes they are successful sometimes they are not..even with things that are in clear violation of the policy.
Some are so obvious you would think I am joking. A recent one was forcing pilots to work on their day off. After several months of discussion and meetings with the company it was decided that a day off is....a day off. Imagine that.
That shouldn't have taken so long. The problem is in an instance where crew support forces you to work on a day off you, you call to SAPA and the response would be to fly the flight and submit a complaint about it. Meanwhile you've already missed your child's birthday party or you had to call in emergency (for a day that was already a day off).
It's sad that SAPA doesn't have enough power to even say "No, that's a breach of policy. You don't have to work that day because it's your day off. We will take care of you"
Wait for the best part.. even though it has been agreed that days off are protected, we haven't seen the last of this problem yet. I'm sure it will come up again in a few months or a year and they will have more meetings to redetermine how they want to interpret the rules.

So I guess my point is that I agree with you completely that the fact that the company doesn't want a union should be enough to keep them playing ball and when that happens everyone wins. But what is the next course of action when the company decides not to play nicely anymore? What if the employees have decided that the current system isn't working anymore?

Well, if this indeed the case, then you have a prime case for a lawsuit due to simple labor laws. I understand that there is only so much a person can type in regards to this, but there has to be a heck of a lot more to those situations than simply "making someone work on their day off".

On another note, do your policies require that all issues must pass through SAPA to management? What is stopping following the chain of command and going directly to management with issues?

RemoveB4Flight
10-16-2017, 10:01 AM
Well, if this indeed the case, then you have a prime case for a lawsuit due to simple labor laws. I understand that there is only so much a person can type in regards to this, but there has to be a heck of a lot more to those situations than simply "making someone work on their day off".

On another note, do your policies require that all issues must pass through SAPA to management? What is stopping following the chain of command and going directly to management with issues?

That is exactly the issue. Our policy manual isn't a legally binding document. It is a collection of handshake agreements with the unwritten understanding that if they are not adhered to, the pilot group may have an interest in seeking representation that can provide a legally binding contract (union).
That might be where we are at currently.
Management is who SAPA mediates with on these issues..sometimes unsuccessfully and never quickly. So calling them doesn't help. I've had several friends call their chief about these issues only to hear the same response. "Just fly the trip and file a report."

rickair7777
10-16-2017, 10:21 AM
I've had several friends call their chief about these issues only to hear the same response. "Just fly the trip and file a report."

Also typical at union airlines. Being right about the contract will not keep them from firing you for disobedience/insubordination if you refuse when they tell you to do something. "Fly it and grieve it".

If there are ANY airlines where you can refuse to do something based on your interpretation of the contract and get off the hook I would like to know. I'm talking about a contractual provision allowing you to refuse any assignment which is not in accordance with the contract.

But even having such a provision might be of limited value... you'd have to be pretty darn sure of your contractual knowledge to play that card if the consequence of being wrong is termination.

RemoveB4Flight
10-16-2017, 10:31 AM
Also typical at union airlines. Being right about the contract will not keep them from firing you for disobedience/insubordination if you refuse when they tell you to do something. "Fly it and grieve it".

If there are ANY airlines where you can refuse to do something based on your interpretation of the contract and get off the hook I would like to know. I'm talking about a contractual provision allowing you to refuse any assignment which is not in accordance with the contract.

But even having such a provision might be of limited value... you'd have to be pretty darn sure of your contractual knowledge to play that card if the consequence of being wrong is termination.

There are issues everywhere regardless of having a union or not. The question is which one is going to be able to back you up when the company tries to pull something.
Are you telling me that you honestly believe that SAPA has the same degree of protection for you in contract (policy) grievances as ALPA does?

CBreezy
10-16-2017, 11:11 AM
Also typical at union airlines. Being right about the contract will not keep them from firing you for disobedience/insubordination if you refuse when they tell you to do something. "Fly it and grieve it".

If there are ANY airlines where you can refuse to do something based on your interpretation of the contract and get off the hook I would like to know. I'm talking about a contractual provision allowing you to refuse any assignment which is not in accordance with the contract.

But even having such a provision might be of limited value... you'd have to be pretty darn sure of your contractual knowledge to play that card if the consequence of being wrong is termination.

The difference might be, does a SAPA grievance result in restitution of some sort? Is there additional pay or a day off later in the month? Or, do they say, 'yeah, our B. Next time we'll get it right?' Even more importantly, is SAPA decidedly pilot partisan or do they often have management best interest in mind?

Mercyful Fate
10-16-2017, 11:53 AM
That is exactly the issue. Our policy manual isn't a legally binding document. It is a collection of handshake agreements with the unwritten understanding that if they are not adhered to, the pilot group may have an interest in seeking representation that can provide a legally binding contract (union).
That might be where we are at currently.
Management is who SAPA mediates with on these issues..sometimes unsuccessfully and never quickly. So calling them doesn't help. I've had several friends call their chief about these issues only to hear the same response. "Just fly the trip and file a report."

A company policy manual however, if violated can give grounds for legal action. If someone is terminated or disciplined, (depending on severity) that company policy manual absolutely can be used as a defense. Company policy manuals are a two way street, protecting management and employees.

Would be interesting to see how familiar your pilot group is to actual company policies, instead of relying on SAPA as their source of information.

sn00p
10-16-2017, 11:56 AM
Company rules? FAR's?

My fault, company rules. I should have been more specific.

RemoveB4Flight provided a good write up.

RemoveB4Flight
10-16-2017, 12:06 PM
A company policy manual however, if violated can give grounds for legal action. If someone is terminated or disciplined, (depending on severity) that company policy manual absolutely can be used as a defense. Company policy manuals are a two way street, protecting management and employees.

Would be interesting to see how familiar your pilot group is to actual company policies, instead of relying on SAPA as their source of information.

It wouldn't be practical to expect anyone to pursue legal action since the pilot would have to fund it on his or her own as an individual since SAPA is funded by the company they obviously can't do it. The company would essentially have to want to take legal action against itself.
However at ALPA they have the means to do that when there is a big issue. And you do have legal protection in the case of wrongful termination and other situations where you may need it.

As far as knowing the policy manual, when something arises we can refer to our policy manual which every employee has access to. But like I said, when crew support tells you one thing, and yet the policy manual clearly states the opposite, you are still forced to bend over.

word302
10-16-2017, 03:12 PM
1% in today's market proved we have no leverage without a union. Even worse is the company's constant disregard for the policy and no protections when they decide to reinterpret the rules to fit their needs each day.
I've never been big on needing/wanting a union myself but times are changing.

How would being union have changed the outcome of the vote? I'm not saying that we don't need one, but the apathy of this pilot group won't change because of representation.

word302
10-16-2017, 03:16 PM
Yes there are. SAPA regularly has updates on instances of the company pulling a new stunt and the details of the uphill battle of them trying to fix it. Sometimes they are successful sometimes they are not..even with things that are in clear violation of the policy.
Some are so obvious you would think I am joking. A recent one was forcing pilots to work on their day off. After several months of discussion and meetings with the company it was decided that a day off is....a day off. Imagine that.
That shouldn't have taken so long. The problem is in an instance where crew support forces you to work on a day off you, you call to SAPA and the response would be to fly the flight and submit a complaint about it. Meanwhile you've already missed your child's birthday party or you had to call in emergency (for a day that was already a day off).
It's sad that SAPA doesn't have enough power to even say "No, that's a breach of policy. You don't have to work that day because it's your day off. We will take care of you"
Wait for the best part.. even though it has been agreed that days off are protected, we haven't seen the last of this problem yet. I'm sure it will come up again in a few months or a year and they will have more meetings to redetermine how they want to interpret the rules.

So I guess my point is that I agree with you completely that the fact that the company doesn't want a union should be enough to keep them playing ball and when that happens everyone wins. But what is the next course of action when the company decides not to play nicely anymore? What if the employees have decided that the current system isn't working anymore?

Again, I don't think you quite understand what a union will bring to the table. If there is a violation, the union will tell you to fly it and grieve it. I am actually in favor of a union, but your arguments are not necessarily helping the cause.

word302
10-16-2017, 03:21 PM
A great example would be the recent change to policy regarding call out for and IOE trip. Until last week the required minimum notification was 24 hours. Company just arbitrarily cut it in half with no say from SAPA or the pilot group.

RemoveB4Flight
10-16-2017, 06:01 PM
How would being union have changed the outcome of the vote? I'm not saying that we don't need one, but the apathy of this pilot group won't change because of representation.

Wouldn't change the outcome of the vote, but it might change the quality of what we are voting on in the first place..which is equally important.
Look at the pay packages the other regionals are offering, then look at our latest.

snackysmores
10-16-2017, 06:01 PM
[/QUOTE]Exactly how many pilots wander the halls of HQ?

Exactly, they'd never expect that: Mutiny from within the highest echelons of the Mormon faith. Managers would be looking over their shoulders all day; no one would know who the traitor was and it would drive them paranoid.

RemoveB4Flight
10-16-2017, 06:20 PM
Again, I don't think you quite understand what a union will bring to the table. If there is a violation, the union will tell you to fly it and grieve it. I am actually in favor of a union, but your arguments are not necessarily helping the cause.

I fully understand what is offered from a union. My last regional was union.
I'm not denying that you might sometimes have to fly it and grieve it no matter where you work but it doesn't seem as prevalent when there are possible repercussions.
Also the way it works here is this: SAPA meets with company and lists complaints. Company can say too bad that's how we are doing it. The policy manual is not legally binding. They can throw the entire thing in the trash if they choose.

I'm not even saying I want a union at Skywest. I'm simply saying things seem to be changing. Regardless of the company claiming that we are adequately staffed, we are not. And as they get more desperate, we may see them get more creative with their interpretation of policy.

jtsastre
10-16-2017, 07:48 PM
I came from Colgan and the Pińacolaba MEC. The contract was definitely noteworthy, but at the end of the day, my paycheck was 80% incorrect and required extensive relays and extra work to get it corrected; the work rules were also disregarded and required extra vigilance.

Came to SkyWest and rarely had an incorrect paycheck or work-rule inconsistency; it was night-and-day.

Not against unions in any way, but that’s my experience.

Mercyful Fate
10-17-2017, 06:19 AM
I fully understand what is offered from a union. My last regional was union.
I'm not denying that you might sometimes have to fly it and grieve it no matter where you work but it doesn't seem as prevalent when there are possible repercussions.
Also the way it works here is this: SAPA meets with company and lists complaints. Company can say too bad that's how we are doing it. The policy manual is not legally binding. They can throw the entire thing in the trash if they choose.

I'm not even saying I want a union at Skywest. I'm simply saying things seem to be changing. Regardless of the company claiming that we are adequately staffed, we are not. And as they get more desperate, we may see them get more creative with their interpretation of policy.


As I have stated before, since using SAPA as your mouthpiece isn't working, I would go directly to management and leave out the middleman.

Mercyful Fate
10-17-2017, 06:20 AM
Exactly, they'd never expect that: Mutiny from within the highest echelons of the Mormon faith. Managers would be looking over their shoulders all day; no one would know who the traitor was and it would drive them paranoid.[/QUOTE]

LOL, sounds like you probably should stick with your own dumpster fire.

RemoveB4Flight
10-17-2017, 07:04 AM
I've had several friends call their chief about these issues only to hear the same response. "Just fly the trip and file a report."

As I have stated before, since using SAPA as your mouthpiece isn't working, I would go directly to management and leave out the middleman.

CP is management.

Mercyful Fate
10-17-2017, 07:07 AM
CP is management.

Going to have to let me know what CP is in reference to....

RemoveB4Flight
10-17-2017, 07:14 AM
Chief pilot

Mercyful Fate
10-17-2017, 07:17 AM
Chief pilot


Ahhhh ok....you don't think if a person in management hears the same things over and over, and gets sick and tired of hearing about it, they won't do something about it?

velosnow
10-17-2017, 07:34 AM
Ahhhh ok....you don't think if a person in management hears the same things over and over, and gets sick and tired of hearing about it, they won't do something about it?

In my time every chief pilot that was actually a good dude eventually couldn't put up the fight anymore and was weeded out.

Mercyful Fate
10-17-2017, 07:53 AM
In my time every chief pilot that was actually a good dude eventually couldn't put up the fight anymore and was weeded out.

If that was the case, they should have never been in the position to begin with.

velosnow
10-17-2017, 10:45 AM
If that was the case, they should have never been in the position to begin with.

Perhaps I wasn't clear, some of the good guys got hammered by some in mgt to the point of futility and just went back to the line. Also I shouldn't have said 'every' as a couple did made it through the BS to stick around or get promoted (RG).

Mercyful Fate
10-17-2017, 11:22 AM
Perhaps I wasn't clear, some of the good guys got hammered by some in mgt to the point of futility and just went back to the line. Also I shouldn't have said 'every' as a couple did made it through the BS to stick around or get promoted (RG).

Are you a pro union guy?

word302
10-17-2017, 12:22 PM
Are you a pro union guy?

Does it matter?

CBreezy
10-17-2017, 01:11 PM
Ahhhh ok....you don't think if a person in management hears the same things over and over, and gets sick and tired of hearing about it, they won't do something about it?

Like fire the pilot for complaining too much? What happens if they do that?

Mercyful Fate
10-17-2017, 01:18 PM
Does it matter?

Oh sorry, did realize I directed that question at you....if it matters or not has nothing to do with you.

Mercyful Fate
10-17-2017, 01:20 PM
Like fire the pilot for complaining too much? What happens if they do that?

We are not talking about one person here....we are talking about situations that impact the group and not an individual. That is a whole other discussion.

word302
10-17-2017, 01:34 PM
Oh sorry, did realize I directed that question at you....if it matters or not has nothing to do with you.

Lol. If only you would take your own advice.

Mercyful Fate
10-17-2017, 02:00 PM
Lol. If only you would take your own advice.

My comment to you was not advice.

word302
10-17-2017, 02:04 PM
My comment to you was not advice.

Girl, don't go away mad.

Mercyful Fate
10-17-2017, 02:26 PM
Girl, don't go away mad.

Yea, lame comeback. You need to put in more effort.

https://i.imgur.com/XCavvfK.gif

SMACFUM
10-17-2017, 04:41 PM
The largest thing when it comes to contract/policy violations is that with a certified union under the NLRB there is a legally defined path to settle disputes and provide restitution.

When a genuine dispute arises between a union and the company it is arbitrated/mediated by a neutral 3rd party. These decisions are legally binding (not always in favor of the union) and are often codified into the contract via MOUs.

The pilot's of SkyWest and SAPA do not participate in this process, because we are not a certified collective bargaining unit. SkyWest pilots are AT WILL employees.

This is the current "grievance" process via SAPA:

1) Pilots fill out a policy grievance on SAPA's broken down, heavily censored, often-hacked, half functioning website, that many pilots can't even access because it isn't updated and been left to decay.

2) After some indeterminate time frame that can be up to several months. The SAPA "president" sits down with management to discuss the policy disputes, and the conversation goes something like this:

SAPA: The policy clearly says XYZ. We interprit the policy on face value to mean XYZ as written.

Management: We don't interpret it that way. We interpret XYZ to actually mean ABC, besides that's what we have done in the past, so that's the way it is.

SAPA: That's not what the policy says, and this is a clear violation.

Management: Well, that's not the way we see it. Sorry. End of discussion. Thanks for coming see you in 6 months. TFAYD.

The results of these policy dispute meetings are occasionally communicated to the pilot group via the broken down, hacked website. However, the vast majority of time the results are never communicated at all. Like all things SAPA related, it's completely on a whim.

When was the last time we had a CSC update? PIC update? Hotel committee update? over a year?
The only updates we've received have been from the "president" blowing smoke up people's buts.

SAPA is a toothless joke, and a sham of an organization funded by the company to give pilots the "illusion" of representation.

velosnow
10-17-2017, 08:14 PM
Are you a pro union guy?

Clearly we don't know each other. But in short, yes indeed.

HermannGraf
10-17-2017, 09:06 PM
We don't want your union. We are very happy with our airline just the way it is Capeesh? You liberals think that you can mutate society into a debased pipedream of false delusions.

Take it easy Il Duce
You only been at Skywest a few years and think you speak for all?

Calm down, the union will not take your gun away and you can keep your degrading women view and you will still be able to hold your meetings in white and not show your face.....

Capisce?

Mercyful Fate
10-18-2017, 02:54 AM
Clearly we don't know each other. But in short, yes indeed.

Yea, don't know how we would know each other...good to know where people stand on the matter. Some on here like to play both sides of the fence, and never admit what side they are really on....So glad to see you are being up front!

RemoveB4Flight
10-18-2017, 04:34 AM
Yea, don't know how we would know each other...good to know where people stand on the matter. Some on here like to play both sides of the fence, and never admit what side they are really on....So glad to see you are being up front!

I don't see anyone playing both sides. Things change and people may rethink their position based on recent events.

You may be a big Ford guy but after you get burned on a couple lemons you might decide you aren't such a big fan.

I've never felt the need for a union. I'm starting to come around to the idea. Not playing both sides..simply maybe making a change in position.

word302
10-18-2017, 06:04 AM
I don't see anyone playing both sides. Things change and people may rethink their position based on recent events.

You may be a big Ford guy but after you get burned on a couple lemons you might decide you aren't such a big fan.

I've never felt the need for a union. I'm starting to come around to the idea. Not playing both sides..simply maybe making a change in position.

I think this is happening to more people everyday.

Nevjets
10-25-2017, 10:19 AM
I came from Colgan and the Pińacolaba MEC. The contract was definitely noteworthy, but at the end of the day, my paycheck was 80% incorrect and required extensive relays and extra work to get it corrected; the work rules were also disregarded and required extra vigilance.



Came to SkyWest and rarely had an incorrect paycheck or work-rule inconsistency; it was night-and-day.



Not against unions in any way, but that’s my experience.


These types of issues say more about the different managements. You admit that pinnacle management eventually paid. So it's not a matter of them disputing what you should be paid. It's just that they had lousy processes for administering pay. And at Skywest, they are very good at paying you correctly. But what if there is a disagreement in pay? Do you have a legally binding grievance process with a neutral arbitrator to decide?

We don't want your union. We are very happy with our airline just the way it is Capeesh? You liberals think that you can mutate society into a debased pipedream of false delusions.


I'm politically very conservative yet support unions in most cases.

By voting in a union or joining one, you are simply choosing to give yourself more rights. These rights come from acts of congress (NLRB and RLA) that give members a collective voice in their working conditions and compensation. There are also responsibilities that come with those rights. It requires management to bargain in good faith and requires workers to abide by the contract. And if gives each the right to a dispute resolution process.

And then if that is not satisfactory, either side, if they have a valid complaint, can file a lawsuit in the court of jurisdiction. That constitutional right does not go away because you are union. Again, you are simply giving yourself more rights (and responsibilities) when you do join one.

Also typical at union airlines. Being right about the contract will not keep them from firing you for disobedience/insubordination if you refuse when they tell you to do something. "Fly it and grieve it".

If there are ANY airlines where you can refuse to do something based on your interpretation of the contract and get off the hook I would like to know. I'm talking about a contractual provision allowing you to refuse any assignment which is not in accordance with the contract.

But even having such a provision might be of limited value... you'd have to be pretty darn sure of your contractual knowledge to play that card if the consequence of being wrong is termination.


At expressjet, I've refused to accept a rolled day off. I've seen it happen many many times, even flight attendants despite there being nothing in the contract that allows us to do that. I've never heard of anyone having to explain themselves, much less getting fired.

Now, if you lie about something you did wrong, or steal, or decide not to show up to work, good luck.

A company policy manual however, if violated can give grounds for legal action. If someone is terminated or disciplined, (depending on severity) that company policy manual absolutely can be used as a defense. Company policy manuals are a two way street, protecting management and employees.

Would be interesting to see how familiar your pilot group is to actual company policies, instead of relying on SAPA as their source of information.


At Skywest, you are an at-will employee. You can only sue on the grounds of any existing federal or state labor law, which any union member also can on top of their grievance process afforded them under their NMB recognized contract.

Well, if this indeed the case, then you have a prime case for a lawsuit due to simple labor laws. I understand that there is only so much a person can type in regards to this, but there has to be a heck of a lot more to those situations than simply "making someone work on their day off".

On another note, do your policies require that all issues must pass through SAPA to management? What is stopping following the chain of command and going directly to management with issues?

You mean like DD did when he paid tens of thousands out of pocket in order to have a judge force management to hire him back? As a member of a union, there is a multi-step grievance process which may ultimately be decided by a neutral arbitrator. And the pilot still maintains the right to file a lawsuit afterward (i.e. NFLPA, Tom Brady), although I've never heard it coming to that. The union pays for this as part of their duty to its members. These proceedings set precedents and apply to future instances. Many times, these outcomes are codified into an MOU so that all pilots benefit. This way, management can't just chalk this one up as a loss and try it a year later to another pilot who may not be able to afford to pay for his legal defense out of pocket while he is out of work.



How would being union have changed the outcome of the vote? I'm not saying that we don't need one, but the apathy of this pilot group won't change because of representation.


Being a member of a union gives you more leverage which can be used to negotiate a better TA.

amcnd
10-25-2017, 02:20 PM
Funny. Everyone bring up 1 case... the DD one. Thats it in the 20+ years ive been here. And that realy was a fight between two peoples personalities.... SAPA is most definitely involved in terminations..

velosnow
10-25-2017, 03:42 PM
Funny. Everyone bring up 1 case... the DD one. Thats it in the 20+ years ive been here. And that realy was a fight between two peoples personalities.... SAPA is most definitely involved in terminations..

The importance of that can't be overshadowed though. DD was a tenured captain who could afford his own legal defense. Many can not and thus wouldn't be able to mount a challenge.

Nevjets
10-25-2017, 05:36 PM
Funny. Everyone bring up 1 case... the DD one. Thats it in the 20+ years ive been here. And that realy was a fight between two peoples personalities.... SAPA is most definitely involved in terminations..


It's one case because not many people can afford $100,000 and no job for a year in order to force management to hire him back. How many other people have just given up their grievance because it's not worth it to them (in time, money, making a name for yourself) or simply couldn't afford to hire an attorney? If you have a union, you don't have to worry about ANY of that. You have representation already paid for you. That alone is a huge deterrent. Because it costs management money to fight every single grievance. They'll end up settling more of them in the pilots favor instead of holding out knowing that eventually the pilot doesn't have the resources to fight it in court, if he wanted to take it to that point. And what pilot would? You'd make a bad name for yourself.

rickair7777
10-25-2017, 05:52 PM
How many other people have just given up their grievance because it's not worth it to them (in time, money, making a name for yourself) or simply couldn't afford to hire an attorney?


How many? I'd like to know. And some names too, you'd think after a decade I'd know some of them...

Actually I know of a few who maybe shouldn't even still be flying 121... but they didn't lie. That's the big thing, don't lie...

File an asap and plead the fifth, or come clean and confess but don't lie.

Not saying it wouldn't be nice to have a union for disciplinary proceedings, but I never saw a huge problem with honest mistakes.

IMO these are not honest mistakes...
- Sitting ORD reserve at Incline Village.
- Departing the pavement and then trying to power-back out of the dirt (in an airplane not approved for power-back).
- Going off the end because you fudged the LDG numbers... after the correct LDG numbers said you didn't have enough RWY.

NewGuy01
10-25-2017, 06:52 PM
I wish I had spent the entire month of May sitting in Incline Village. Instead of sitting within 2 hrs of ORD and not getting one call.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nevjets
10-26-2017, 10:08 AM
How many? I'd like to know. And some names too, you'd think after a decade I'd know some of them...

Actually I know of a few who maybe shouldn't even still be flying 121... but they didn't lie. That's the big thing, don't lie...

File an asap and plead the fifth, or come clean and confess but don't lie.

Not saying it wouldn't be nice to have a union for disciplinary proceedings, but I never saw a huge problem with honest mistakes.

IMO these are not honest mistakes...
- Sitting ORD reserve at Incline Village.
- Departing the pavement and then trying to power-back out of the dirt (in an airplane not approved for power-back).
- Going off the end because you fudged the LDG numbers... after the correct LDG numbers said you didn't have enough RWY.


What I'm trying to say is that if there was another case like DD's you'd probably never know because the odds of that happening again (management learned that lesson) to someone who can be unemployed and fund their own defense at the tune of tens of thousands will more than likely never happen again. But I'm pretty sure that smaller issues go unsettled because there is no representation on retainer to deal with them while the pilot deals with flying and earning a living. Just having that is a huge deterrent and it keeps management more honest and from dealing with pilots on an ad-hoc basis.

As for pilot tricks, they usually get some time off without pay to think about it. But that's after exercising (if they choose) their contractually binding grievance process.

A union is like voting. Everyone has the right to vote along with all your other constitutional rights. But you cannot exercise that right until you register to vote. Having the a union is like registering to vote. That right is there for you but only after you've registered. Otherwise, you are deferring your right to someone else.

rickair7777
10-26-2017, 05:23 PM
A union is like voting. Everyone has the right to vote along with all your other constitutional rights. But you cannot exercise that right until you register to vote. Having the a union is like registering to vote. That right is there for you but only after you've registered. Otherwise, you are deferring your right to someone else.

Not like registering to vote at all. Reference the 24th amendment...

Nevjets
10-27-2017, 12:25 PM
Not like registering to vote at all. Reference the 24th amendment...


No analogy is perfect. The point I'm making is that ANYONE who wants to exercise their constitutional right to vote is required to register in BEFORE being able exercise that right. In other words, we have to jump through hoops in order to give ourselves the right to vote. Same for many at the workplace. You can decide not to exercise your right to collectively bargain. But if you do want to give yourself that extra right, you have to jump through hoops. Hence my flawed analogy. The analogy being that we have rights that need some sort of prerequisite before being able to use them. I hope that has cleared any confusion. But let me know if it didn't and I'll try again.

WesternSkies
10-27-2017, 02:34 PM
We vote on things too.

I don’t get it.

Nevjets
10-27-2017, 05:52 PM
We vote on things too.



I don’t get it.


You don't have an NMB recognized bargaining agent working under the auspices of the RLA. You are an at-will employee. Until you do, you are not "registered to vote."

rickair7777
10-27-2017, 09:48 PM
You don't have an NMB recognized bargaining agent working under the auspices of the RLA. You are an at-will employee. Until you do, you are not "registered to vote."

Over-rated at the regionals.

Nevjets
10-27-2017, 09:58 PM
Over-rated at the regionals.


Not really.

chrisreedrules
10-27-2017, 10:15 PM
Over-rated at the regionals.

Not at all, actually.

Nevjets
10-28-2017, 04:47 PM
Not at all, actually.


He thinks that mesa would be better off non-union with JO as CEO. Or that endeavor and republic would've done better in bankruptcy as at-will employees. Or that the grievance process has never helped pilots. Or that countless safety initiatives haven't make a difference in reducing risk. Or that kcm doesn't matter. Or that aeromedical has never saved someone's career. Or etc etc. Some people will always be in denial, I guess.

chrisreedrules
10-28-2017, 05:57 PM
He thinks that mesa would be better off non-union with JO as CEO. Or that endeavor and republic would've done better in bankruptcy as at-will employees. Or that the grievance process has never helped pilots. Or that countless safety initiatives haven't make a difference in reducing risk. Or that kcm doesn't matter. Or that aeromedical has never saved someone's career. Or etc etc. Some people will always be in denial, I guess.

I know people who have been directly helped by ALPA in time of need. Anyone who thinks that a union, even at the regional level is a waste of time is just ignorant or brainwashed or both.

gojo
10-29-2017, 03:33 AM
Over-rated at the regionals.

Nope the union does everything for regionals that they do for mainline. What’s lacking is job security. Why, because we are contract carriers. Look at the national level where they continue to fight against NAI and such. That benefits everyone. And I don’t think you realize how close that was to becoming a reality. Had that been allowed to happen it would’ve eventually changed this industry again.

RJDio
10-29-2017, 07:37 AM
Funny. Everyone bring up 1 case... the DD one. Thats it in the 20+ years ive been here. And that realy was a fight between two peoples personalities.... SAPA is most definitely involved in terminations..

What about RJ, the sapa prez? Or DVV (former brazilia LCA) from Fat who busted a PC? Or that new guy BV fired about six months ago up in PDX without sapa present? Or the 7-8 prop captains that were not afforded the opportunity to transition to the e175 because of their failed attempts on the crj? Or my new hire friend who forced to resign by the former DEN CP RG or be fired while on probation for bogus reasons, she was previous 121 and not a novice on how to behave at an airline . Sapa's response was they were unable to even attend the disciplinary meeting.

Crazy Canuck
11-01-2017, 05:20 AM
...SkyWest work rules agreement or equivalent.


Here they are:

Section 1: Scheduling

https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/5ad42822486b354276f42ebbf7b54650797f539e/c=109-0-2695-1944&r=x393&c=520x390/local/-/media/Phoenix/None/2014/10/08/635483833411090274-phxdc5-5glfqep10sk35zrqhvb-original.jpg

You may have the fat end or the thin end first, but it's all going up there one way or the other....

amcnd
11-01-2017, 05:31 AM
What about RJ, the sapa prez? Or DVV (former brazilia LCA) from Fat who busted a PC? Or that new guy BV fired about six months ago up in PDX without sapa present? Or the 7-8 prop captains that were not afforded the opportunity to transition to the e175 because of their failed attempts on the crj? Or my new hire friend who forced to resign by the former DEN CP RG or be fired while on probation for bogus reasons, she was previous 121 and not a novice on how to behave at an airline . Sapa's response was they were unable to even attend the disciplinary meeting.

Failed training is “failed training”. If the 4-5 E120 captains can’t pass training like the other 4512 pilots at OO, then training is holding the standard... there is more to most those stories..

Nevjets
11-01-2017, 07:42 AM
Failed training is “failed training”. If the 4-5 E120 captains can’t pass training like the other 4512 pilots at OO, then training is holding the standard... there is more to most those stories..


Is there a training review board that has at least one pilot representative on it? A TRB is standard at all union airlines. There are almost always extenuating circumstances (the other side of those stories). Anyone that's been on property for at least one year deserves to have their issues heard before a TRB.

Jonneaux
11-01-2017, 08:03 AM
Is there a training review board that has at least one pilot representative on it? A TRB is standard at all union airlines. There are almost always extenuating circumstances (the other side of those stories). Anyone that's been on property for at least one year deserves to have their issues heard before a TRB.

It takes work to get fired from this place. A failure in training won't do it. You get two attempts at each seat. If you fail, you go back to your previous seat. After a year you can try again. If you fail again, you go back to your previous seat and cannot bid for that seat again. We had some Brasilia Captains fail the CRJ twice and then failed the ERJ. A few got caught short when the Brasilia was retired and they had less than a year to retirement. The company won't send anyone to training with less than a year left, so they were forced to retire.

One very senior Brasilia Captain who failed transition to the CRJ twice and the ERJ once was kept on in an administrative role until he turned 65. Another was at about 150 hours of IOE in the ERJ and still not getting it, they offered to have him downgrade to ERJ FO for a year and then attempt it again. He elected to retire early.

If you get fired from this place, you've earned it.

TonyC
11-01-2017, 11:21 AM
It takes work to get fired from this place. A failure in training won't do it. You get two attempts at each seat. If you fail, you go back to your previous seat. After a year you can try again. If you fail again, you go back to your previous seat and cannot bid for that seat again.

...

If you get fired from this place, you've earned it.




You should talk to TonyWilliams about that. He found out he could be a SAPA Rep and be fired after a single training failure. Tell him how he earned being fired. I'd like to see this conversation.




... I would think of it much like SkyWest Airlines with their "Right to Work" state of Utah, which really means you can be sacked at any time for whatever failing you may have.









.

Jonneaux
11-01-2017, 11:57 AM
You should talk to TonyWilliams about that. He found out he could be a SAPA Rep and be fired after a single training failure. Tell him how he earned being fired. I'd like to see this conversation.

.


I've never hard of this individual. What was the time frame? Upgrade used to be up or out, but that ended many years ago.

TonyC
11-01-2017, 12:04 PM
I've never hard of this individual. What was the time frame?




He was a SAPA cheerleader before you joined APC, but you can still read his posts and learn a little history. Who knows, maybe he'll chime in.






.

rickair7777
11-01-2017, 05:16 PM
I've never hard of this individual. What was the time frame? Upgrade used to be up or out, but that ended many years ago.


It was up or out that got him.

CRJ to EMB, with no previous EMB time... not trivial.

Up or out was never really a big deal... except for the upgrade + transition scenario.

BrewCity
11-01-2017, 06:05 PM
A few got caught short when the Brasilia was retired and they had less than a year to retirement. The company won't send anyone to training with less than a year left, so they were forced to retire.



How is that not considered age discrimination?

trip
11-01-2017, 06:08 PM
It was up or out that got him.

CRJ to EMB, with no previous EMB time... not trivial.

Up or out was never really a big deal... except for the upgrade + transition scenario.

Didn't he stall it on the ride, and not during the maneuvers portion.

rickair7777
11-01-2017, 08:56 PM
How is that not considered age discrimination?

Pretty sure they paid them guarantee at CRJ rates... good way to see the world as a nonrev.

rickair7777
11-01-2017, 08:57 PM
Didn't he stall it on the ride, and not during the maneuvers portion.

Don't recall much, although TW told me about it at the time.

But the bro was on PC at the time, not AQP so it would not have been MV/LOFT format.

jtsastre
11-01-2017, 09:55 PM
Is there a training review board that has at least one pilot representative on it? A TRB is standard at all union airlines. There are almost always extenuating circumstances (the other side of those stories). Anyone that's been on property for at least one year deserves to have their issues heard before a TRB.

Caution, slippery slope. I flew with one of the LCA at Colgan who was one of the instructors with Renslow. Sounds like he was basically passed around until someone eventually signed him off. Definitely someone who the “company” and ALPA should have noticed and let go.

rickair7777
11-02-2017, 06:40 AM
Caution, slippery slope. I flew with one of the LCA at Colgan who was one of the instructors with Renslow. Sounds like he was basically passed around until someone eventually signed him off. Definitely someone who the “company” and ALPA should have noticed and let go.

ALPA (or any union) would never decide to "let someone go". They are essentially required by law or legal precedent to back a union member to the hilt in all cases, disciplinary, training, etc... even though the union membership and leaders might personally prefer not to. Union can argue for higher admission standards (ie 1500 rule), but once you're in they have to stand up for you.

I think there are exceptions only for anti-union activity.

Nevjets
11-02-2017, 07:32 AM
Caution, slippery slope. I flew with one of the LCA at Colgan who was one of the instructors with Renslow. Sounds like he was basically passed around until someone eventually signed him off. Definitely someone who the “company” and ALPA should have noticed and let go.


Having a TRB doesn't mean that pilots who cannot satisfactorily pass get passed around. It means you get to tell your side of the story to people (one of which is a union rep) who aren't emotionally invested in your situation.

ALPA (or any union) would never decide to "let someone go". They are essentially required by law or legal precedent to back a union member to the hilt in all cases, disciplinary, training, etc... even though the union membership and leaders might personally prefer not to. Union can argue for higher admission standards (ie 1500 rule), but once you're in they have to stand up for you.

I think there are exceptions only for anti-union activity.


Federal law states that every covered person, whether they are a dues paying member or not, have a duty of fair representation. In other words, everyone has a right to be represented at a disciplinary hearing (nothing to do with a TRB although everyone has a right to that as well but in a different context of DFR that you are alluding to). But that doesn't mean that just because you have the right to representation that you have the right to get away with things. In cases of obvious egregious misconduct, the Rep is there to ensure the grievance process is as the contract requires. I always advised guys to be honest, take your lumps, learn from it, and move on. And that's pretty much all you can do as a Rep when someone was obviously in the wrong, make sure they get their due process and that they don't make it worse for themselves.

rickair7777
11-02-2017, 07:50 AM
Federal law states that every covered person, whether they are a dues paying member or not, have a duty of fair representation. In other words, everyone has a right to be represented at a disciplinary hearing (nothing to do with a TRB although everyone has a right to that as well but in a different context of DFR that you are alluding to). But that doesn't mean that just because you have the right to representation that you have the right to get away with things. In cases of obvious egregious misconduct, the Rep is there to ensure the grievance process is as the contract requires. I always advised guys to be honest, take your lumps, learn from it, and move on. And that's pretty much all you can do as a Rep when someone was obviously in the wrong, make sure they get their due process and that they don't make it worse for themselves.

Yes, this is as it should be and certainly did not mean to imply otherwise. Union's duty is to assist, not judge or filter members. Otherwise internal union politics would inevitably mean some folks got more than their fair share of representation, and some folks less.

Nevjets
11-02-2017, 12:54 PM
Yes, this is as it should be and certainly did not mean to imply otherwise. Union's duty is to assist, not judge or filter members. Otherwise internal union politics would inevitably mean some folks got more than their fair share of representation, and some folks less.


I've been at an mec meeting where a Rep outright refused to represent a certain pilot because of his history of antics even though this particular time was a minor issue. The attorney represented him despite it not being a termination event, when the attorney normally gets inserted.

RJDio
11-03-2017, 08:58 AM
Failed training is “failed training”. If the 4-5 E120 captains can’t pass training like the other 4512 pilots at OO, then training is holding the standard... there is more to most those stories..

Not defending the pilots in question. Just pointing out there's been more pilots fired than the aforementioned incident in Slc. SKW management is very good at keeping those items hush hush.

Those e120 captains were a clear example on how the company decided to interpret the policy manual to fit their pov and sapa was helpless in compelling them otherwise.

Iceberg
11-03-2017, 11:08 AM
Caution, slippery slope. I flew with one of the LCA at Colgan who was one of the instructors with Renslow. Sounds like he was basically passed around until someone eventually signed him off. Definitely someone who the “company” and ALPA should have noticed and let go.

I could be wrong on the timing, but wasn’t Colgan non union when that happened?

Also, do you suppose without having actually seen training records, he needn’t be tossed in front of a bus? I would like to think the rumor mill wouldn’t write an epitaph. I do know airlines now train stall recovery differently after that accident.

jtsastre
11-03-2017, 12:20 PM
I could be wrong on the timing, but wasn’t Colgan non union when that happened?

Also, do you suppose without having actually seen training records, he needn’t be tossed in front of a bus? I would like to think the rumor mill wouldn’t write an epitaph. I do know airlines now train stall recovery differently after that accident.

The year previous the accident they joined ALPA, I believe. My point was that the LCA was conveying that the company was in over their head with aircraft deliveries and needed to fill them, therefore pushing guys like Renslow through.

I agree with a union having good protections, but while there, the inept company definitely shined through more so than the union.

4fun
11-13-2017, 06:31 AM
Sorry to bother you guys, I dont work for you.
Can you tell me your experience with your PBS system and if its better than others you've worked with, or if you've ever worked in a system without PBS?

Check Complete
11-14-2017, 07:31 PM
Sorry to bother you guys, I dont work for you.
Can you tell me your experience with your PBS system and if its better than others you've worked with, or if you've ever worked in a system without PBS?

Quite simply AOS PBS,is the worst POS for the pilots, UN-godly to understand and has been fully tailored to accommodate the company. The software processes on what is a global need and will bypass seniority to complete the process to meet the company's need. The pilot PBS hotline is staffed by former computer engineers and in their words the program has been intentionally designed extensively over complex.

Bottom line is, I have talked with the most senior crew members at various domiciles and they usually never get exactly what they bid for. A few years ago the most senior FO in DEN ended up working christmas but obviously bid for it off.

The crew members that like it are usually very high end computer savv, but most hate it.

The company loves it!

What does that tell you?

LAX2MSP
11-15-2017, 04:16 AM
Quite simply AOS PBS,is the worst POS for the pilots, UN-godly to understand and has been fully tailored to accommodate the company. The software processes on what is a global need and will bypass seniority to complete the process to meet the company's need. The pilot PBS hotline is staffed by former computer engineers and in their words the program has been intentionally designed extensively over complex.

Bottom line is, I have talked with the most senior crew members at various domiciles and they usually never get exactly what they bid for. A few years ago the most senior FO in DEN ended up working christmas but obviously bid for it off.

The crew members that like it are usually very high end computer savv, but most hate it.

The company loves it!

What does that tell you?

It’s an unfriendly and unforgiving system but like with anything else of that nature, if you take the time and learn to use it, it ends up not being so bad.

rickair7777
11-15-2017, 05:48 AM
It’s an unfriendly and unforgiving system but like with anything else of that nature, if you take the time and learn to use it, it ends up not being so bad.

The system is fine. The epic failure is that the company controls all the global parameters, anyone looking to switch from hard lines to PBS needs absolute and comprehensive language controlling all global parameters, ie it needs to be agreed upon in advance what those parameters are.

For one thing, require absolute respect for seniority, nobody works x-mas (unless they did it to themselves) while a junior gets it off... the system needs to re-shuffle pairings to make it work.

Global optimization is beneficial to the company, so they will fight for it. A pilot group will need to hire technical expert(s) to advise them in negotiating contract rules for PBS parameters. Do not let ANY parameter go unaccounted for in the contract. Also need blanket language preventing ANY uncoordinated changes of ANYTHING on the part of the company.

Otherwise they will quite literally create a new parameter, with functions similar to or same as one which is contractually controlled but simply give it a different name. Example, assume these parameters exist in PBS, and there values/use is limited by the contract.

Screw.Pilots
Hose.Pilots

Without contractual language covering the system cart-blanche, the company could simply create new subroutines, copying the guts of the ones they're not allowed to abuse but name them thus...

Bunny.Rabbit
Puppy.Dog


A lesser but real issue is that tech savvy bidders will be at an advantage, by that I mean if you have a computer science degree or programming experience, your mind will be better able to grasp the intricacies... it's complex enough that there's an art to it. You will have a significant virtual seniority bump compared to your liberal arts peers. No amount of training (other than years of programming experience) can totally fix this IMO. Even the #1 dude can easily hose himself for x-mas, and will typically have done so before he learns a few things.

The real benefit of PBS to the pilot is schedule flexibility, ie you can get Tue off one week and Fri off the next and so on, ie not locked into the same weekly footprint all month (although you can bid for a consistent footprint if you like it). You can also do things like load up your flying and get 9 days off and nonrev to europe without vacation.

N1234
11-15-2017, 07:59 AM
The system is fine. The epic failure is that the company controls all the global parameters, anyone looking to switch from hard lines to PBS needs absolute and comprehensive language controlling all global parameters, ie it needs to be agreed upon in advance what those parameters are.

For one thing, require absolute respect for seniority, nobody works x-mas (unless they did it to themselves) while a junior gets it off... the system needs to re-shuffle pairings to make it work.


While I agree that the pilot group needs control of all parameters, I disagree with the statement that PBS doesn't respect seniority. The issue with x-mas and other holidays is that every day is the same in the eye of PBS. All it sees is that it needs to assign flying and removes any obstacles that get in the way. It doesn't differentiate between x-mas and any other day off.

So what you would need is a day-off hierarchy that projects down the seniority list, i.e. a senior guy says x-mas off is more important than another day off. Once PBS gets to CN people it knows that not every day is equal. In turn it could protect the more important day off for the senior guy and give the x-mas trip to the junior guy. In turn the senior guy may not get another weekend day off that was deemed less important.

And no - our current 7 level hierarchy doesn't do that.

rickair7777
11-15-2017, 09:09 AM
While I agree that the pilot group needs control of all parameters, I disagree with the statement that PBS doesn't respect seniority. The issue with x-mas and other holidays is that every day is the same in the eye of PBS. All it sees is that it needs to assign flying and removes any obstacles that get in the way. It doesn't differentiate between x-mas and any other day off.

So what you would need is a day-off hierarchy that projects down the seniority list, i.e. a senior guy says x-mas off is more important than another day off. Once PBS gets to CN people it knows that not every day is equal. In turn it could protect the more important day off for the senior guy and give the x-mas trip to the junior guy. In turn the senior guy may not get another weekend day off that was deemed less important.

And no - our current 7 level hierarchy doesn't do that.

No, erase that entire paradigm. You have Stockholm syndrome.

If it has to do a CN, it needs to TOTALLY re-adjust ALL junior schedules BEFORE assigning that CN to a senior pilot who bid those day(s) off.

Unless there are hard schedule conflicts (training, vacation) which limit the solution, NO senior person should EVER work on a day he requested off if someone junior has that day off. You are correct that x-mas is irrelevant, that's just the obvious example.

This is hypothetical to a typical large hub base. Understood that a small boutique base may not have enough pairings, or enough pairing diversity to accomplish this.

The only way to prevent unreasonable manipulation of schedules out of seniority is to allow NO manipulation out of seniority. Otherwise it's too complicated and the company will get away with murder.

N1234
11-15-2017, 09:51 AM
No, erase that entire paradigm. You have Stockholm syndrome.

If it has to do a CN, it needs to TOTALLY re-adjust ALL junior schedules BEFORE assigning that CN to a senior pilot who bid those day(s) off.

Unless there are hard schedule conflicts (training, vacation) which limit the solution, NO senior person should EVER work on a day he requested off if someone junior has that day off. You are correct that x-mas is irrelevant, that's just the obvious example.

This is hypothetical to a typical large hub base. Understood that a small boutique base may not have enough pairings, or enough pairing diversity to accomplish this.

The only way to prevent unreasonable manipulation of schedules out of seniority is to allow NO manipulation out of seniority. Otherwise it's too complicated and the company will get away with murder.


Yes, you could do that. But that could mean a couple of things:

1. have drop more stuff into open time which is not gonna happen. This would be one of the key parameters to control (to your earlier point) - or

2. effectively abandon the pairing preferences and make days off absolute and with a hierarchy. So for example, you CN junior people over x-mas and senior people get x-mas off. But if you still allocate all the flying, senior people may still get CN'ed over another day off or get their P1 pairing pulled and replaced with a PN because that is the only PBS can cover all the flying (or give you enough credit or whatever other reason there is). as long as there is a mandate to cover all flying there is a good chance that you will get screwed somewhere. Today there is no direct way to tell PBS where you preferably get screwed if you get screwed.

Or think of it the other way. PBS looks down at all the day off requests. At some point it will need to ignore them and place flying on those days anyway. If you are at that mid-level seniority where you have requested three days off that PBS needs. But for some other legality, line build (max working days etc.) or other it can only assign you one CN - which one is it going to pick?

rickair7777
11-15-2017, 10:30 AM
Thats assuming that staffing is a fixed parameter, it's not (Stockholm syndrome).

If pbs were adjusted to better respect seniority, the company would have to hire a few more pilots. Oh well.

I'm not sure suggesting every requested day off needs to be granted, only that seniority is reflected as to who gets that day off. If a senior pilot creates a Chinese puzzle that pbs cannot solve that's on him. But if his last layer contains only a very specific bid, then no junior pilot should ever get that day off instead of the senior.

N1234
11-15-2017, 11:23 AM
Thats assuming that staffing is a fixed parameter, it's not (Stockholm syndrome).


It shouldn't be but effectively is. There is nothing that prescribes staffing levels, min reserve requirements etc.

How do you get it in now? I really don't know how that could be accomplished. At this point the company is working everyone to the max with no end in sight. And if there is some slack, they are very good at finding new flying.

Make it happen - more power to you if you could solve that problem.

Jonneaux
11-15-2017, 03:02 PM
How about no CN’s allowed at all. If PBS can’t cover a trip, drop it into open time at time and a half.

N1234
11-15-2017, 06:23 PM
How about no CN’s allowed at all. If PBS can’t cover a trip, drop it into open time at time and a half.

How is that supposed to work?

Everyone bids every day of the month off and all pairings end up in open time?

Or everyone bids x-mas off and all x-mas trips end up in open time?

Jonneaux
11-16-2017, 06:43 AM
How is that supposed to work?

Everyone bids every day of the month off and all pairings end up in open time?

Or everyone bids x-mas off and all x-mas trips end up in open time?

Cover it with reserves of pony up more money until someone picks it up.

N1234
11-16-2017, 09:18 AM
Cover it with reserves of pony up more money until someone picks it up.

So, all trips over x-mas gets dumped into open time? And then you need to have enough reserves to cover it all. And they are not doing anything the rest of the month (because line pilots want to fly those days)?

This is an extreme scenario but I am sure you can appreciate the inefficiencies there.

Most importantly, how do you get the company to agree on any of this? Try to nail them down on say 20% reserve staffing level to start with.

rickair7777
11-16-2017, 06:38 PM
It shouldn't be but effectively is. There is nothing that prescribes staffing levels, min reserve requirements etc.

How do you get it in now? I really don't know how that could be accomplished. At this point the company is working everyone to the max with no end in sight. And if there is some slack, they are very good at finding new flying.

Make it happen - more power to you if you could solve that problem.

Oh I solved the problem.

As for you guys...

Get a union? Then settle in for a drawn-out contract battle over a period of years. This tough because the up-and-comers don't want to rock the boat, and the super-senior guys view unions... poorly.

SAPA could try to focus on QOL next time around. The company will avoid that like the plague. All recent enhancements have been linked to credit... so you get more, but only if you work more (pay, 401k, PPS, etc). A completely new paradigm would be to seek QOL enhancements that don't involve working more (min reserves, vacation slots, min days off, cadence, etc). I tried to tell them that last time.

Check Complete
11-16-2017, 07:04 PM
Oh I solved the problem.

As for you guys...

Get a union? Then settle in for a drawn-out contract battle over a period of years. This tough because the up-and-comers don't want to rock the boat, and the super-senior guys view unions... poorly.

SAPA could try to focus on QOL next time around. The company will avoid that like the plague. All recent enhancements have been linked to credit... so you get more, but only if you work more (pay, 401k, PPS, etc). A completely new paradigm would be to seek QOL enhancements that don't involve working more (min reserves, vacation slots, min days off, cadence, etc). I tried to tell them that last time.


You are painting with a very broad brush my friend!

I have voted yes on every union vote since the first one, teamsters, to give a time reference.

I'd vote yes tomorrow, and I know many close to my seniority would do so as well.

Nevjets
11-16-2017, 08:37 PM
Oh I solved the problem.

As for you guys...

Get a union? Then settle in for a drawn-out contract battle over a period of years. This tough because the up-and-comers don't want to rock the boat, and the super-senior guys view unions... poorly.

SAPA could try to focus on QOL next time around. The company will avoid that like the plague. All recent enhancements have been linked to credit... so you get more, but only if you work more (pay, 401k, PPS, etc). A completely new paradigm would be to seek QOL enhancements that don't involve working more (min reserves, vacation slots, min days off, cadence, etc). I tried to tell them that last time.


How long is your current agreement for? Five years? And who said a new contract has to be drawn out? It won’t take half that time to get a new contract. New leadership would probably poll the pilot group to figure out what to negotiate. The parts you guys are already happy with would just be copied and pasted into the new contract.

Paid2fly
11-17-2017, 12:23 AM
You are painting with a very broad brush my friend!

I have voted yes on every union vote since the first one, teamsters, to give a time reference.

I'd vote yes tomorrow, and I know many close to my seniority would do so as well.








Same here...