FDX - 4A2b
02-19-2010 | 07:02 AM
#22
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
You are correct. Folks do not need to assume that they could only furlough from the panel of the 727. A little from this a/c and a little from that a/c, you get the point.
02-19-2010 | 07:16 AM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,047
Likes: 0
From: 767 FO
You mean furlough out of seniority order? Please explain how a little here and a little there works?
I agree they could furlough at anytime. I just don't think they can do it and fly any or all of the acft while maintaining a 48/61 min guarantee.
I agree they could furlough at anytime. I just don't think they can do it and fly any or all of the acft while maintaining a 48/61 min guarantee.
02-19-2010 | 07:29 AM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
From: Excessed B-727 Capt
No. Never out of seniority order. Start at the bottom of the seniority list and work your way up. This would have pulled bodies out of each of the "junior" seats. The '48/61 min guarantee' you mention is a minimum bid periord guarantee. Anything less than that would be bought up to that level. It isn't a "can't build above" threshold.
02-19-2010 | 07:44 AM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,047
Likes: 0
From: 767 FO
No. Never out of seniority order. Start at the bottom of the seniority list and work your way up. This would have pulled bodies out of each of the "junior" seats. The '48/61 min guarantee' you mention is a minimum bid periord guarantee. Anything less than that would be bought up to that level. It isn't a "can't build above" threshold.
What is the intent of this language: 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.
Could the company furlough and have bid guarantees above normal 68/85 as you imply they could? If so why have this language in the contract?
I guess the arbitrator will tell us who is right. Well not really because there can be only one intent for putting that language in the contract. But the arbitrator will tell us how incompetent our lawyers and contract negotiators are.
02-19-2010 | 08:00 AM
#26
gets every day off
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
From: Retired MD11 Capt
It is my opinion that you are wrong.
What is the intent of this language: 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.
Could the company furlough and have bid guarantees above normal 68/85 as you imply they could? If so why have this language in the contract?
I guess the arbitrator will tell us who is right. Well not really because there can be only one intent for putting that language in the contract. But the arbitrator will tell us how incompetent our lawyers and contract negotiators are.
What is the intent of this language: 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.
Could the company furlough and have bid guarantees above normal 68/85 as you imply they could? If so why have this language in the contract?
I guess the arbitrator will tell us who is right. Well not really because there can be only one intent for putting that language in the contract. But the arbitrator will tell us how incompetent our lawyers and contract negotiators are.
Lag,
The word before "bid period guarantee" is MINIMUM. Not maximum. There is no mention of a maximum in this contract, either in 4.a.2.b or anywhere else that I'm aware of.
I don't like 4.a.2.b or the company's implementation any more than the next guy, but ya gotta read the contract with the words that are there, not the words you wish were there.
02-19-2010 | 08:18 AM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
From: Excessed B-727 Capt
Here's how I see it.
Minimum Bid Period Guarantee - 4a1 sets this at 68/85. Normally Bid Line Guarantees are built above these values. When the company built below these values, they bought up to these numbers.
4a2b - 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.
Ok, 48/60 is the new MBPG. They can build above these values, but if built below they must be bought up to these numbers. Never implied that the company could have them above 68/85. But as we all know, there is no language in the contract that is keeping them from doing it now.
Minimum Bid Period Guarantee - 4a1 sets this at 68/85. Normally Bid Line Guarantees are built above these values. When the company built below these values, they bought up to these numbers.
4a2b - 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.
Ok, 48/60 is the new MBPG. They can build above these values, but if built below they must be bought up to these numbers. Never implied that the company could have them above 68/85. But as we all know, there is no language in the contract that is keeping them from doing it now.
02-19-2010 | 09:51 AM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,047
Likes: 0
From: 767 FO
Lag,
The word before "bid period guarantee" is MINIMUM. Not maximum. There is no mention of a maximum in this contract, either in 4.a.2.b or anywhere else that I'm aware of.
I don't like 4.a.2.b or the company's implementation any more than the next guy, but ya gotta read the contract with the words that are there, not the words you wish were there.
The word before "bid period guarantee" is MINIMUM. Not maximum. There is no mention of a maximum in this contract, either in 4.a.2.b or anywhere else that I'm aware of.
I don't like 4.a.2.b or the company's implementation any more than the next guy, but ya gotta read the contract with the words that are there, not the words you wish were there.
I am not arguing that the section is written poorly. Would you like me to say that our lawyers and negotiators are idiots again. I am saying what is the intent of the language? Now if you are arguing intent has nothing at all to do with arbitration then make that argument and we can continue.
02-19-2010 | 10:07 AM
#29
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,184
Likes: 0
From: leaning to the left
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
