FDX - What we want the Union to do to stop DP flying.
04-06-2008 | 06:18 PM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,876
Likes: 0
From: 767 CA
The union should send out a weekly message line that says:
"The following DP trips were flown by the following individuals. Anyone seeing these pilots please encourage them to fill out a trip report to the SIG."
"The following DP trips were flown by the following individuals. Anyone seeing these pilots please encourage them to fill out a trip report to the SIG."
04-06-2008 | 06:36 PM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
From: B777
Agreed JJ,
I think we have a Theme emerging in this thread -- Educate me on DP process and it's implications beyond what is written in the CBA and up to the non-disclosure limits.
As I said, I had no idea the implications until I listened to JI's explanation. I understand that he is to do a presentation at the next joint council meeting, but that is 3 months away, and the middle of the summer (aka poor attendance). It would be nice to have something sooner and available electronically.
I'm not sure whether this issue is too hard to fix now (no leverage- right?) or whether it is deemed a bad use of present resources. Would be nice to know the answer to that one too.
I think we have a Theme emerging in this thread -- Educate me on DP process and it's implications beyond what is written in the CBA and up to the non-disclosure limits.
As I said, I had no idea the implications until I listened to JI's explanation. I understand that he is to do a presentation at the next joint council meeting, but that is 3 months away, and the middle of the summer (aka poor attendance). It would be nice to have something sooner and available electronically.
I'm not sure whether this issue is too hard to fix now (no leverage- right?) or whether it is deemed a bad use of present resources. Would be nice to know the answer to that one too.
04-06-2008 | 07:17 PM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,047
Likes: 0
From: 767 FO
They would have to win something first. What is their claim, I flew this trip and they said I flew this trip? Now all my friends wont speak to me? Tell me how is this any different then posting a list of dues paying non-members?
04-07-2008 | 04:04 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 531
Likes: 0
From: Bent Over
However, that doesn't restrict individuals within the union from acting. If you want to post a list of DP flyers in the AOC, go ahead.
04-07-2008 | 04:59 AM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
From: FDX Airbus F/O
Could someone please explain to me why the union could not start a campaign, simply to educate the membership on the issues associated with disputed pairings. It wouldn't be directive in nature, which could be construed as leading the crew force to not pick up these pairings, thereby enticing a number of legal RLA issues, but it certainly could be used to explain the ramifications to the crew force, when a DP is flown voluntarily.
They sure didn't waste their time and worry about a law suit with the 'LOA Road Show' and the sold that POS!
So how about some educational leadership, the 'DP Road Show' and get them to sell those as bad...
Oh, I know, the Union might hurt the Company's feelings??
04-07-2008 | 04:59 AM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,047
Likes: 0
From: 767 FO
Are you a lawyer? Obviously the union has access to a number of lawyers who have advised that any harassment of individuals acting within the confines of the contract could be grounds for a lawsuit that they would probably lose.
However, that doesn't restrict individuals within the union from acting. If you want to post a list of DP flyers in the AOC, go ahead.
However, that doesn't restrict individuals within the union from acting. If you want to post a list of DP flyers in the AOC, go ahead.
No I'm not a lawyer are you DW? It may be obvious to you it is not obvious to me. Just because a union dosen't want to do something does not mean the lawyers have told them no. It could mean they are trying not to offend anyone and are just trying to build a nice business relationship. If the union has asked is it OK to publish an educational list with trips and names; what have they been told? Or is that a state secret (like poll results)? Big difference between can't do that and you may have some liability attached. My guess is they would be told keep it in house and make sure you are accurate.
Maybe we should ask a teamster lawyer; What do you mean publish a list? You gonna whack em? You can't whack em! Has this room been swept for bugs.
04-07-2008 | 06:00 AM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 531
Likes: 0
From: Bent Over
No I'm not a lawyer are you DW? It may be obvious to you it is not obvious to me. Just because a union dosen't want to do something does not mean the lawyers have told them no. It could mean they are trying not to offend anyone and are just trying to build a nice business relationship. If the union has asked is it OK to publish an educational list with trips and names; what have they been told? Or is that a state secret (like poll results)? Big difference between can't do that and you may have some liability attached. My guess is they would be told keep it in house and make sure you are accurate.
Maybe we should ask a teamster lawyer; What do you mean publish a list? You gonna whack em? You can't whack em! Has this room been swept for bugs.
Maybe we should ask a teamster lawyer; What do you mean publish a list? You gonna whack em? You can't whack em! Has this room been swept for bugs.
Ok, you're losing me here. My point was there are limits to what the union can do when people are acting within the confines of the CBA. They've made it clear in the past that they could be held liable in court if they go too far to discourage anyone from flying DPs. Not that they can't discourage people from it, just that there are limits to how far they can go. This was reiterated in previous posts from Albie.
I was being somewhat facetious in my comments about posting a list of DP flyers in the AOC. My guess is you don't want to do it but would be happy if someone else did.
04-07-2008 | 06:04 AM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
From: MD-11
[quote=FDXLAG;357296]No I'm not a lawyer are you DW?
FDXLAG is spot on! There are plenty of lawyers who fly here. I've flown with a few of them. Perhaps they could review this issues themselves and advise us. Public information about who is flying DP's, if couched in terms of education or information only, just like the non-member status page, may pose no threat of retalitory lawsuit.
Of course, perhaps ALPA does not wish the DP's to disappear. Maybe another secret agreement with their business partner?
FDXLAG is spot on! There are plenty of lawyers who fly here. I've flown with a few of them. Perhaps they could review this issues themselves and advise us. Public information about who is flying DP's, if couched in terms of education or information only, just like the non-member status page, may pose no threat of retalitory lawsuit.
Of course, perhaps ALPA does not wish the DP's to disappear. Maybe another secret agreement with their business partner?
04-07-2008 | 06:07 AM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 531
Likes: 0
From: Bent Over
[quote=PicklePausePull;357319]
Okay, go ahead and ask them to review it instead of just posting something here. Let us all know what you hear back.
No I'm not a lawyer are you DW?
FDXLAG is spot on! There are plenty of lawyers who fly here. I've flown with a few of them. Perhaps they could review this issues themselves and advise us. Public information about who is flying DP's, if couched in terms of education or information only, just like the non-member status page, may pose no threat of retalitory lawsuit.
Of course, perhaps ALPA does not wish the DP's to disappear. Maybe another secret agreement with their business partner?
FDXLAG is spot on! There are plenty of lawyers who fly here. I've flown with a few of them. Perhaps they could review this issues themselves and advise us. Public information about who is flying DP's, if couched in terms of education or information only, just like the non-member status page, may pose no threat of retalitory lawsuit.
Of course, perhaps ALPA does not wish the DP's to disappear. Maybe another secret agreement with their business partner?
Okay, go ahead and ask them to review it instead of just posting something here. Let us all know what you hear back.
04-07-2008 | 06:47 AM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Since the blocker could have moved days around or dropped days, this isn't a 100% solution...BUT, it does provide a little more info.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
