FDX Mar LAX FO lines
02-09-2008, 07:35 PM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Posts: 732
Originally Posted by max8222
nitefr8r, Thanks for the info. As most of us in LAX since the beginning know, the flying we get is what MEM allows us to have. Only a few good trips to throw the senior Capt's a bone.
i
i
02-09-2008, 08:24 PM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,068
Originally Posted by Gunter
I simply don't believe in the conspiracy you describe.
I believe the company builds the pairings and gives them to the SIG.
I believe the company schedulers use the optimizer to build these pairings that are often within hard and soft parameters.
I believe the SIG works to improve what they get between when the pairings come out and when the lines are required to be built.
In short, I believe the SIG works to make the lines better.
If the process breaks down, disputed pairings are designated.
I also believe we gave the company all the ammo they needed to optimize in the latest contract.
And I don't equate a heated conversation as intent to mess with anyone's seniority.
Sorry. We will have to agree to disagree
I believe the company builds the pairings and gives them to the SIG.
I believe the company schedulers use the optimizer to build these pairings that are often within hard and soft parameters.
I believe the SIG works to improve what they get between when the pairings come out and when the lines are required to be built.
In short, I believe the SIG works to make the lines better.
If the process breaks down, disputed pairings are designated.
I also believe we gave the company all the ammo they needed to optimize in the latest contract.
And I don't equate a heated conversation as intent to mess with anyone's seniority.
Sorry. We will have to agree to disagree
As nitefr8r said, I wouldn't call it a conspiracy, either but it's not surprising. This type of thing has occurred with unions on other properties as well. It's not that hard as percentage wise many pilots don't understand the machinations of not only their contract but how their union representation operates as well. In fact, imo compared to other unions it's easier for such things to go on here since we have most of our comm. and meetings out of a place that the vast majority of pilots don't live in-more so than most other carriers.
02-09-2008, 10:35 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Great White North
Posts: 391
Originally Posted by nitefr8r
...I asked the LAX SIG Reps to work with me to put together a scheduling survey for the domicile as one had never been done. These guys were working w/o any clear idea of what the majority of troops wanted...
The scheduling survey has still never been done and the council newsletter never got launched...
The scheduling survey has still never been done and the council newsletter never got launched...
02-10-2008, 08:33 AM
#24
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: MD-11 Captain
Posts: 88
Originally Posted by 2cylinderdriver
I can assure you and all others in this thread that the flying, to include the amount and type of pairings assigned to each domicile are 100% controlled by the Company. If the SIG Chairman said otherwise, I would be very surprised. Call the Union Officer's or SIG Members, they will set the record straight.
And you can be surprised all you want about what the SIG chairman told me, but it wasn't the only time and frankly during the 2 1/2 years I was C-100 Vice chairman, I personally found his attitude regarding the LAX domicile to be rather hostile.
And the absurdity continues. Late last year, I was on a dh to MEM on a pairing that finished at MEM (several days later) with a DH to LAX, I ran into a classmate who is a MEM MD-11 Captain and he was doing the mirror image of my trip, except his DH's were to/from LAX. As I told the SIG Chairman about the computer programs he was so proud of: garbage in, garbage out. That set him off several years ago as well.
All I could do as vice-chairman was hint about these things in the official communications I wrote to C-100. Everything that was written by us had to pass through the MEC for approval. In 2 1/2 years, not 1 letter was approved without at least 1 major revision. On this particular issue, I had a choice of re-writing the Council update or not getting it sent out. That was pretty much the way it was stated to me by the MEC Chairman (DW). I chose to re-write it. In retrospect, I wish I'd just sent it out on my own with an addition as to why it wasn't coming from ALPA, at the time I had the entire domiciles addresses and emails. That's hindsight for you though.
Guys, this all history and rehashing it won't change it. You can believe what you want about how the SIG is run and how flying is allocated, it doesn't make it so and we're simply not going to convince each other.
I wish those of you who wish to stay involved and volunteer well, you'll need all the sanity you can find in dealing with our MEC, let alone management. We are our own worst enemies.
Aloha.
02-10-2008, 09:09 AM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Posts: 732
Originally Posted by nitefr8r
The flying is not controlled by some monolithic entity called the company. It pops out of a computer that says this flying should be done by LAX, this flying by MEM etc. The rub comes in the stuff that cannot be manned due to the staffing at the various domiciles. That's where the turf wars start. There was zero recognition on the SIG's part that certain flying is inhertnly more efficient at some domiciles than others. "That's our flying and we will take it" prevails more often than not.
And you can be surprised all you want about what the SIG chairman told me, but it wasn't the only time and frankly during the 2 1/2 years I was C-100 Vice chairman, I personally found his attitude regarding the LAX domicile to be rather hostile.
And the absurdity continues. Late last year, I was on a dh to MEM on a pairing that finished at MEM (several days later) with a DH to LAX, I ran into a classmate who is a MEM MD-11 Captain and he was doing the mirror image of my trip, except his DH's were to/from LAX. As I told the SIG Chairman about the computer programs he was so proud of: garbage in, garbage out. That set him off several years ago as well.
All I could do as vice-chairman was hint about these things in the official communications I wrote to C-100. Everything that was written by us had to pass through the MEC for approval. In 2 1/2 years, not 1 letter was approved without at least 1 major revision. On this particular issue, I had a choice of re-writing the Council update or not getting it sent out. That was pretty much the way it was stated to me by the MEC Chairman (DW). I chose to re-write it. In retrospect, I wish I'd just sent it out on my own with an addition as to why it wasn't coming from ALPA, at the time I had the entire domiciles addresses and emails. That's hindsight for you though.
Guys, this all history and rehashing it won't change it. You can believe what you want about how the SIG is run and how flying is allocated, it doesn't make it so and we're simply not going to convince each other.
I wish those of you who wish to stay involved and volunteer well, you'll need all the sanity you can find in dealing with our MEC, let alone management. We are our own worst enemies.
Aloha.
And you can be surprised all you want about what the SIG chairman told me, but it wasn't the only time and frankly during the 2 1/2 years I was C-100 Vice chairman, I personally found his attitude regarding the LAX domicile to be rather hostile.
And the absurdity continues. Late last year, I was on a dh to MEM on a pairing that finished at MEM (several days later) with a DH to LAX, I ran into a classmate who is a MEM MD-11 Captain and he was doing the mirror image of my trip, except his DH's were to/from LAX. As I told the SIG Chairman about the computer programs he was so proud of: garbage in, garbage out. That set him off several years ago as well.
All I could do as vice-chairman was hint about these things in the official communications I wrote to C-100. Everything that was written by us had to pass through the MEC for approval. In 2 1/2 years, not 1 letter was approved without at least 1 major revision. On this particular issue, I had a choice of re-writing the Council update or not getting it sent out. That was pretty much the way it was stated to me by the MEC Chairman (DW). I chose to re-write it. In retrospect, I wish I'd just sent it out on my own with an addition as to why it wasn't coming from ALPA, at the time I had the entire domiciles addresses and emails. That's hindsight for you though.
Guys, this all history and rehashing it won't change it. You can believe what you want about how the SIG is run and how flying is allocated, it doesn't make it so and we're simply not going to convince each other.
I wish those of you who wish to stay involved and volunteer well, you'll need all the sanity you can find in dealing with our MEC, let alone management. We are our own worst enemies.
Aloha.
There is no selection of trips, flight or cities inputed by any Union SIG rep that I know of and if there was I would agree that this should be made known to the crew force.
Just my opinion, but based on some knowledge of current practices.
If you do not like the pairings, complain to the Company and copy the Union.
02-10-2008, 05:12 PM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MD11 FO
Posts: 1,109
Originally Posted by MaxKts
I was asked that question and refused to answer it! Can't say I trust either one. 
For me I told them I trust the company more. It's surprising and it you told me 4 years ago when I was hired that I would have a greater trust in management then in my union I'd say you were crazy but alas.... Disappointing actually.
02-11-2008, 08:37 AM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: MD-11 Capt
Posts: 330
THE LAST THREE POSTS!!!!!!!!
These three posts are so accurate I can't believe there isn't more rage on this type stuff....
I don't trust either one .....the company or the union any further than I can throw them and the SIG info is correct...the guys doing the work work with what they get, but the SIG chairman and the movement of "our flying" DOES happen.
These three posts are so accurate I can't believe there isn't more rage on this type stuff....
I don't trust either one .....the company or the union any further than I can throw them and the SIG info is correct...the guys doing the work work with what they get, but the SIG chairman and the movement of "our flying" DOES happen.
02-11-2008, 02:05 PM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,409
Originally Posted by nitefr8r
I'm probably not the person to ask on these things. I have a tenuous relationship with the MEC and about to be worse with the C-100 LEC chairman. I'm also tired (apparently) and grumpy. So, with that disclaimer ....
Yes, there was a recall attempt and yes it failed. As to the mechanics of the failure, I can't say as I don't know. Recalls are not easy, though common enough (my wife is a UAL C-34 pilot and they've made a tradition out of recalling LEC officers). It takes concerted effort to get someone out of office.
The Wilson Center is an interesting organization. Their polling is accurate enough but is probably running into a few modern era problems: Caller ID, answering machines, voice mail etc. If I don't recognize a number, I won't answer it any longer. That'll cut down on your pool of responses somewhat. As to the question: gads, I'd have to answer the company and that's a real shock to me. And I don't like the answer either.
Finally let me remind people that we are all the good guys, even those we think are close to the devil incarnate around here. They're doing what they think is best and trying to do right. They may suck at it but still .... they're not evil (I think). Doesn't mean they can't or shouldn't be tossed out of office, but they are not the bad guys they're just not our guy.
Besides a little revolution now and then is a good thing.
Yes, there was a recall attempt and yes it failed. As to the mechanics of the failure, I can't say as I don't know. Recalls are not easy, though common enough (my wife is a UAL C-34 pilot and they've made a tradition out of recalling LEC officers). It takes concerted effort to get someone out of office.
The Wilson Center is an interesting organization. Their polling is accurate enough but is probably running into a few modern era problems: Caller ID, answering machines, voice mail etc. If I don't recognize a number, I won't answer it any longer. That'll cut down on your pool of responses somewhat. As to the question: gads, I'd have to answer the company and that's a real shock to me. And I don't like the answer either.
Finally let me remind people that we are all the good guys, even those we think are close to the devil incarnate around here. They're doing what they think is best and trying to do right. They may suck at it but still .... they're not evil (I think). Doesn't mean they can't or shouldn't be tossed out of office, but they are not the bad guys they're just not our guy.
Besides a little revolution now and then is a good thing.
02-11-2008, 02:38 PM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: MD-11 Capt
Posts: 330
Max822,
Would you please call Steve McCabe about this....I have already sent this to him and he is interested but checked with sched and they said there weren't that many without landings....I don't really know how you looked it up, but if you want to pursue it he is interested.
Would you please call Steve McCabe about this....I have already sent this to him and he is interested but checked with sched and they said there weren't that many without landings....I don't really know how you looked it up, but if you want to pursue it he is interested.
02-12-2008, 09:22 AM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 599
42go, The lines in LAX have been very cyclical the past few years. I am sure it depends on a lot of factors. It seems with the last few months they have not bounced back like they have in past years. Up till jan the lines have been OK with mixed RFO/FO lines. It is the Feb and Mar lines that have turned for the worst. Quite a few RFO only lines. Factor in that most guys would rather try and pick up a trip in open time to get a landing than go to MEM for a sim ride has probably kept guys off of Steve's screen. If the April bid pack does not improve then I imagine things will get harder. I am using info from other pilots and SW.
I will contact Steve this week about it.
I will contact Steve this week about it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
