Originally Posted by FDXLAG
(Post 290912)
Of course reducing BLG below contract mins is no more legal than changing the rigs or the mpdp.
4.A.2.b. The minimum bid period guarantee shall be reduced to a minimum of 48/60 CH before any pilot is furloughed. At least a full bid period must follow the announcement of this action. This provision shall only be used to prevent or delay a furlough. 4.B. . . . Prior to any adjustments, however, a BLG shall not be less than the minimum bid period guarantee as provided in Section 4.A.1. (above). If the sum of trip guarantees for trips on a pilot's regular line is less than the minimum bid period guarantee, such pilot's BLG shall be increased to the minimum bid period guarantee. 4.C. . . . Prior to any adjustments, however, an RLG shall not be less than the minimum bid period guarantee as provided in Section 4.A.1. (above). I am sure there is a setting on the optimizer to assure that a 63CH regular line will work 15 days in a 4-week month. But it seems more likely that regular and secondary line holders could get extra pay (pay up to 65CH min) and maybe an extra day off; while reserve guys will have to work all 15 days (as normal/usual). My point is that the bean counters may have postulated that the best/cheapest path is to "pay up" to the 65CH min on several lines in order to buy a little more time to assess the this unique conflagration of events. But then again, what do I know. We all will know more next week when the Feb bidpacks hit the street. |
No arguments. I have said the same thing myself. In the furlough section it talks about what has to happen before furlough and that is where the union gets its input.
My point is the company probably would love to see a 727 or DC-10 BLG reduction but would like to keep the other jets flying. I am sure they are tired of paying 200 S/0 RLG to sit on our rumps. Bottomline no one should be forced to take BLG < 68 if there are still people flying BLG + 30. But I still think this is all smoke and mirrors to fill the FDAs. PS, I'll bet it works. |
The bean counters don't care about "divide and conquer", but I'm sure that the other mgt folks aren't going to go out of their way to correct any misconceptions on our part.
|
But the bean counters do see too many pilots sitting around in the back seat and not enough bidding over seas.
|
Originally Posted by FlybyKnite
(Post 290962)
Public math is problematic, but a min RLG is guaranteed and that means that as an absolute worst case, if all the lines go to the minimum 68/85 that RLG will be 65/81 (not very likely IMHO) ..
For example, my Bus Jan reserve line pays 85 RLG, but the computed value of RLG is 84+16 (96% x 87+47). I know that's only 8 minutes, but point being the "min" of 68/85 applies across the board to all crewmembers: line holder, vto, rsv. |
I said public math was problematic and worst, I absolutely hate public Math Word problems. You've got 4.C that says no less than 4.A.1 (68/85) and you've got the 96% of BLG. So I guess the min is the min until it ain't and then it is 96% of BLG. Yep, I agree with you a300fr8dig and can only offer the weak excuse that I am a little cross-eyed from watching football all day long.
|
Originally Posted by FlybyKnite
(Post 291008)
I am a little cross-eyed from watching football all day long.
I'm starting to wish for the old days when we just had conference tie-ins and didn't care about trying to prove who was number one. |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:33 AM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands