SIG Disputed Pairings
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: leaning to the left
Posts: 4,184
Why are there so many disputed pairings anyway? Did we screw up the scheduling/work rules sections of the contract that bad? I think there should be no DPs at all. Either a trip is legal and compliant with the CBA or it's not. If its not, it should not be in the bidpack...
However, when greedy individuals can't see past their noses, and corrupt the process, with their selfishness...That section of the contract becomes almost meaningless. And in effect, invalidates all the work our SIG does, on our behalf.
I was told by our SIG chair, that not flying DPs is essential to the process. If we want to fight these onerous trips.
#25
May I remind you that the CBA also contains the disputed pairing "process". Yes we did vote these work rules in but part of the CBA is the SIG and PSIT. To say we must live with these pairings because they comply with the CBA and FARs is only part of the story. The "dispute process" also complies with the CBA that "we" voted in. The process doesn't work well when we have independent contractors trying to enhance their bottom line.
I have no idea how many pairings are built across the airframes each month excluding peak, but roughly 20 to 25ish at most are disputed each month. Could there be another way to ensure that small percentage is never displayed to the crewforce?
I'm not making excuses for those who voluntarily fly DP's nor am I disagreeing with you. I'm simply suggesting it may be time to try a different approach now or next CBA, before the optimizer really goes out of control.
#27
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: FedEx
Posts: 666
Just check out the calendar of this Capt on this disputed pairing. The guy works every week.
https://pilot.fedex.com/vips-bin/vip...?MEM?27?9OCT07
https://pilot.fedex.com/vips-bin/vip...?MEM?27?9OCT07
Nice.
FJ
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post