Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums - Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. Join our community today and start interacting with existing members. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.


User Tag List

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 03-17-2008, 06:53 PM   #1  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
boxhauler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: MD-11 Captain
Posts: 206
Default FDX: BKO grievance

A group grievance has been filed by the union disputing how the company is paying "block over 8". "the block over ten, although part of the trip guarantee, is in addition to the trip rig flown, not just scheduled. Therefore, the trips overage and OSC should have been paid based upon trip rig plus the block in excess of 8, plus the guarantee (block in excess of 10) for those duty days where the block was in excess of 10." As an example, if your block was scheduled at 11+30, you should be paid an extra 2 hours pay (capturing the between 8 and 10 hours) regardless whether your actual block is less than 11+30 due to winds, etc. Right now if you block 11+00 instead of 11+30, the company is only paying 1+30 extra pay, docking you the +30 that the union claims is part of your trip guarantee. Clear as mud?....figured this may apply to a few of you.......
boxhauler is offline  
Old 03-18-2008, 01:30 PM   #2  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Flaps50's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: B777 FO FDX, C130 ANG
Posts: 532
Default

Wow, that total BS!

We better win this one. The current interpretation and failure to make the 8-10 block part of the trip guarantee is a major windfall for the company as it stands.
Flaps50 is offline  
Old 03-18-2008, 06:09 PM   #3  
Gets Weekends Off
 
cma2407's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: Row well and live...
Posts: 494
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaps50 View Post
Wow, that total BS!

We better win this one. The current interpretation and failure to make the 8-10 block part of the trip guarantee is a major windfall for the company as it stands.
It also artificially reduces RLG for reserve holders, which skirts the normal calculations for pay, and results in lost income for not only the "over 8'er", but all reserve pilots to boot.
cma2407 is offline  
Old 03-18-2008, 06:24 PM   #4  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MD11 FO
Posts: 707
Default

I'd be real surprised if we win this one. Frankly I'm surprised that the Union is even willing to file it. As a guy who flies a lot of int'l I'm ****ed that we got taken on this clause but when it comes down to it the CBA definitely makes a difference between block over 8 and block over 10 and once the legal ease is explained, is not that hard to understand (see the older threads on this topic). This is one of those cases where the NC and lawyers either should have known or did know but certainly didn't sell it this way to the crew force before voting/implementaton. The NC got handed their a**es on this one.
Tuck is offline  
Old 03-19-2008, 08:26 PM   #5  
Part Time Employee
 
MaxKts's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
Posts: 1,917
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuck View Post
I'd be real surprised if we win this one. Frankly I'm surprised that the Union is even willing to file it. As a guy who flies a lot of int'l I'm ****ed that we got taken on this clause but when it comes down to it the CBA definitely makes a difference between block over 8 and block over 10 and once the legal ease is explained, is not that hard to understand (see the older threads on this topic). This is one of those cases where the NC and lawyers either should have known or did know but certainly didn't sell it this way to the crew force before voting/implementaton. The NC got handed their a**es on this one.
Where does the CBA make a difference between the two? The change was to replace 10 with 8. It was not how to redefine 10 and make it 8!
MaxKts is offline  
Old 03-19-2008, 09:39 PM   #6  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 117
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxKts View Post
Where does the CBA make a difference between the two? The change was to replace 10 with 8. It was not how to redefine 10 and make it 8!
The problem is WE (the NC, all the ALPA lawyers, and the 4,000+ pilots who should have read the contract prior to voting) missed the error in the CBA. The CBA redefined ACH (Actual Credit Hours) to capture 8, it did not redefine Trip Guarantee (Section 4.F.). It is spelled in black and white in the contract. Trip Guarantee and Actual Credit Hours are defined explicitly.

THERE IS NO WAY WE WIN THIS GRIEVANCE.

Last edited by mrzog2138; 03-19-2008 at 11:44 PM.
mrzog2138 is offline  
 
 
 

 
Post Reply
 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Unhappy with FDX ALPA/ALPA NAtional.....what to do? hamfisted Cargo 52 06-22-2008 10:19 PM
What's the best way to get a job w/ FDX? Laxrox43 Cargo 77 06-05-2008 09:28 AM
FDX message line fdxflyer Cargo 14 12-22-2007 09:43 AM
FDX Alpa pushing age 65 Retro noguardbaby Cargo 35 11-12-2007 06:34 AM
FDX Stocks and FDX Pilots angry tanker Cargo 20 07-10-2007 04:31 AM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:15 AM.