I'm in the middle of learning more lessons about disputed pairings...

I figured that being on the make-up list - you could decline disputed pairings. Thats what I did... sort of.

Scheduling called my cell this afternoon while I was out and I said, "Is that a disputed pairing? Sounds like one to me. If it is, I can't accept it." Scheduler said, "I don't know, I don't keep track of that. Besides, you signed up for make-up, so you're being assigned this trip..."

So I call the union, talk to Dxxxx in Contract Admin. _avid is the subject of many comments on this forum. He said, we've come across this before, and there's no problem with you flying it... it's like flying a disputed pairing when you're on reserve.

Then I get to my computer, and come to the source of all knowledge, and I find this thread:

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/sh...42408#poststop

which has a link to the alpa SIG page https://crewroom.alpa.org/FDX/Deskto...cumentID=39409

...which says this:
What? D____ gave me worthless info? It couldn't be!

So I try to drop the trip, and VIPS won't let me - it's "inside the assignment window".

Then I call scheduling, say I want to drop the trip, and they say it's too late to just drop it (27 hrs prior to show time), but they'll show me as a "NO-SHOW" for the trip. I said, NO, don't do that, I'll call my chief pilot and talk with him about it.

They dropped me from the trip anyway... because I mentioned I might not be able to make it legal with FedEx deadheads.

I called my CP, and he said, call during business hrs - there's plenty of time to work this one out. He's on vacation or something... not doing CP duties right now anyway.

So right now... I dropped the trip, but shown as a NO -SHOW by crew scheds. Jason his name. Thanks Jason.

Question for you all: to comply with our unified intent of not flying disputed pairings, does nobody list themselves for general makeup? Or is the ALPA info old? (Making _avid correct with his answer.) Shouldn't we grieve this with the company - making the argument that getting a trip assigned to us that we can't say no to - can't make a choice of "no disputed pairings" on the trip qualifications - can't drop after we get - is a NON VOLUNTARY trip, and therefore should not count against us in the disputed pairing process?

Anyone?

 

I wish I had an answer for you. I don't believe the scheduler didn't know it was a disputed pairing though. I think you did the right thing when you asked him right away. They shouldn't be allowed to put anyone on one in this case.

On the note of _avid. I was beginning to think I was the only one who gets the same answer every time I talk to him. I don't think I've ever heard anything but the company's side from him. If an area is ever gray, he seems to lean toward just "letting it go" or saying you won't win that one.
If this has all been said before, sorry. I thought maybe I was the only one.

 

I am not sure but have been told that David was a scheduler for Pinnacle (Express I) before he came here. Hated pilots there. Anybody please speak up if I heard a false rumor. Anyway, it doesn't matter. He isn't making any effort to work for the FedEx pilots that pay his salary and has the same attitude as the MEC. I hope after we get rid of DW and his merry band of clowns (WR and DM), we will fire this AH. He should go out of his way to fight for us and be kissing our collective a$$es.

 

Bone,

I think that ALPA page has been modified since I first linked it. But, it looks to me like what _avid and the SIG page says, are the same thing.

I think this: Voluntary: Putting “volunteer for general trips” or “general make-up” in as a request in any make-up status and then being assigned a disputed pairing in open time. Means you have volunteered for ANY trip, if you put in for "general" make up and not specific trips.

And, I concur with most of the comments on here about _avid. I've described my conversations with him as, "It was like talking to my ACP...Maybe, worse."

 

My CP was willing to help, but knew I'd get better help in the AM from an ACP. D... I'm not sure.

 

He was actually in charge of scheduling and did not perform scheduling functions. I believe he may have been the senior manager of that department. Correct on the not liking pilots and managed by the "do it because we say so, then grieve it" method. I find it difficult to believe that he is completely on our side. That's all I got to say 'bout that...

 

You're absolutely right on this one. NOT ONCE has he been of help (except for the company it seems). I had to force him to back me up once after pulling the contract out and reading it to him word for word. I too think we need him replaced with someone who at least tries to work for us.

 

I agree with all comments about _avid. I have spoken to him on a few occasions and only got the company line. He is not serving us (the ones that pay his salary). He needs to go. That entire office needs new blood....

As far as general makeup, I don't know many people that still use that. Sick calls are now visible in the morning, and these are usually the most desirable trips. You can see trips in open time when they become available, and I would prefer to see what I am getting into rather than hope for the best with general makeup. I once asked for west coast layovers and got Denver. It's west of Memphis, but not exactly west coast... Anyway, to each his own, but I stay away from general makeup....

 

Ditto on _avid. He's never helped me out either, and as a result, I'm now gun shy about calling the union on contract admin stuff. Too bad....!

FXboneguy, you did the right thing. Scheduling tried that crock on me once: the i don't know anything about disputed pairings thing...you know they know...the "planet" knows all!
Z

 

_avid, megga dittos. Don't ever buy the can't talk about that because we are in "Secret" discussions line.