Sick leave and mini-RLG (fedex)
03-13-2011, 05:09 PM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,224
Sick leave and mini-RLG (fedex)
I was wondering if anyone has dealt with this issue below:
"CBA 14.B.2.c.i – “Mini-RLG and sick bank debits”
The changes in this section are what we refer to as “codification” of current practice. The addition of “mini-RLG” has to do with custom or secondary lines that are constructed with blocks of R days that constitute a “mini-RLG.” For reserve line holders, if you are listed sick for an entire bid month of r days you are “charged” the entire value of your RLG from your sick account.
The current practice is that if you have a “mini-RLG” AND you are sick for the entire block, your sick account will be charged with the value of your mini-RLG. That is what has been captured in this addition, so that pilots understand and know the rules as they pertain to this scenario.
In summary, there is no change to the current “leveling” practice found in CBA 14.B.2.c. Whether you are on a “RLG” or “mini-RLG,” your sick account will only debited for trips you would have been assigned as if you were not sick, unless you remain sick for ALL R days in a month. If you remain sick for ALL R days in a month, your sick account is debited for the full value of RLG or applicable mini-RLG."
I read the contract (not the TA) and the old section reads as follows:
" A pilot holding a line comprised entirely of R-days and who is sick for all such R-days shall be compensated his RLG and shall have his sick leave reduced by such RLG."
I have no idea how "past practice" allows someone that has a mini-RLG (quite possibly a Secondary line or Custom line composed of R days and trips) have to use his sick bank for the entire month (of R days) if he is sick. The contract verbiage is very succinct for once, it says "A pilot holding a line comprised entirely of R-days". If you have trips and R days (happens fairly often on custom and Secondary lines), you should only have to have your sick bank deducted when they would have assigned you a trip.
I don't think this is the case. If it happened to me, I would ask to file a grievance. I believe this is yet another give back and is not "codification of current practice." If it is, we really are letting the company steamroll us. This section is very clear.
"CBA 14.B.2.c.i – “Mini-RLG and sick bank debits”
The changes in this section are what we refer to as “codification” of current practice. The addition of “mini-RLG” has to do with custom or secondary lines that are constructed with blocks of R days that constitute a “mini-RLG.” For reserve line holders, if you are listed sick for an entire bid month of r days you are “charged” the entire value of your RLG from your sick account.
The current practice is that if you have a “mini-RLG” AND you are sick for the entire block, your sick account will be charged with the value of your mini-RLG. That is what has been captured in this addition, so that pilots understand and know the rules as they pertain to this scenario.
In summary, there is no change to the current “leveling” practice found in CBA 14.B.2.c. Whether you are on a “RLG” or “mini-RLG,” your sick account will only debited for trips you would have been assigned as if you were not sick, unless you remain sick for ALL R days in a month. If you remain sick for ALL R days in a month, your sick account is debited for the full value of RLG or applicable mini-RLG."
I read the contract (not the TA) and the old section reads as follows:
" A pilot holding a line comprised entirely of R-days and who is sick for all such R-days shall be compensated his RLG and shall have his sick leave reduced by such RLG."
I have no idea how "past practice" allows someone that has a mini-RLG (quite possibly a Secondary line or Custom line composed of R days and trips) have to use his sick bank for the entire month (of R days) if he is sick. The contract verbiage is very succinct for once, it says "A pilot holding a line comprised entirely of R-days". If you have trips and R days (happens fairly often on custom and Secondary lines), you should only have to have your sick bank deducted when they would have assigned you a trip.
I don't think this is the case. If it happened to me, I would ask to file a grievance. I believe this is yet another give back and is not "codification of current practice." If it is, we really are letting the company steamroll us. This section is very clear.
03-13-2011, 06:24 PM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 394
Originally Posted by golfandfly
If it happened to me, I would ask to file a grievance. I believe this is yet another give back and is not "codification of current practice." If it is, we really are letting the company steamroll us. This section is very clear.
If you go to the section in the contract on PFC, you'll see the little scales of justice thing next to the section you are talking about. Basically, the grievance was for a guy that had vacation, then went sick over his remaining days (Mini-RLG). He was docked the entire value of his Mini-RLG. He/ALPA grieved it and lost.
It appears the TA just adds the language from the grievance.
03-13-2011, 06:29 PM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 426
This IS the current practice.
Last year I had a "mini-RLG" on my line. I was sick for those days.
My DSA had BOTH TRIPS AND THE ENTIRE "mini-RLG" removed. (I had been assigned a few trips on the "mini-RLG" days). I contacted the company and pointed to the error that was made. FDX credited my DSA for the trips. The "mini-RLG" was the sick time removed from my DSA.
As for arguing whether this is a give-back, different issue.
Codification of current practice, yes.
Last year I had a "mini-RLG" on my line. I was sick for those days.
My DSA had BOTH TRIPS AND THE ENTIRE "mini-RLG" removed. (I had been assigned a few trips on the "mini-RLG" days). I contacted the company and pointed to the error that was made. FDX credited my DSA for the trips. The "mini-RLG" was the sick time removed from my DSA.
As for arguing whether this is a give-back, different issue.
Codification of current practice, yes.
03-13-2011, 08:49 PM
#4
Part Time Employee
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
Posts: 1,918
Originally Posted by matty
There already was a grievance for this. We lost...shocking, I know!
If you go to the section in the contract on PFC, you'll see the little scales of justice thing next to the section you are talking about. Basically, the grievance was for a guy that had vacation, then went sick over his remaining days (Mini-RLG). He was docked the entire value of his Mini-RLG. He/ALPA grieved it and lost.
It appears the TA just adds the language from the grievance.
If you go to the section in the contract on PFC, you'll see the little scales of justice thing next to the section you are talking about. Basically, the grievance was for a guy that had vacation, then went sick over his remaining days (Mini-RLG). He was docked the entire value of his Mini-RLG. He/ALPA grieved it and lost.
It appears the TA just adds the language from the grievance.
bidding reserve and knocking out some of the days with vacation does not produce a "mini BLG". A mini BLG is when you have trips and reserve in the same month (ie custom line or secondary line).
the grievance was lost because the pilot was awarded a line that was made entirely of R days (section 14.B.2.c) and some were removed due to vacation. This is not the same as a "mini RLG".
Again this is just another example of the company taking advantage of weak language and weak contract enforcement on our part
But as AA put it in another thread - it will only affect a few people....
03-14-2011, 03:33 AM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Posts: 556
Originally Posted by MaxKts
bidding reserve and knocking out some of the days with vacation does not produce a "mini BLG". A mini BLG is when you have trips and reserve in the same month (ie custom line or secondary line).
the grievance was lost because the pilot was awarded a line that was made entirely of R days (section 14.B.2.c) and some were removed due to vacation. This is not the same as a "mini RLG".
Again this is just another example of the company taking advantage of weak language and weak contract enforcement on our part
But as AA put it in another thread - it will only affect a few people....
the grievance was lost because the pilot was awarded a line that was made entirely of R days (section 14.B.2.c) and some were removed due to vacation. This is not the same as a "mini RLG".
Again this is just another example of the company taking advantage of weak language and weak contract enforcement on our part
But as AA put it in another thread - it will only affect a few people....
), if you list sick on any R-day, you have a pretty good chance of getting leveled either way. If you happen to be sick for a long block on a mini-rlg you have a good chance of already being leveled for the full amount of your mini-rlg before you trigger the "sick for all of the days rule".Personally I would prefer to see us go to a sick pay for each r day, I have been hit for a 72 hour trip when I was only sick for 3 days of a 15 day stretch and I have a real hard time doing make up sick. Reserve pilots want and deserve higher pay per day, I think getting docked sick time would be better if it was also done on a r day for r day basis. I have never made out on the lottery of not being charged, which is the golden nugget that many view as the advantage in the sick reserve policy. YMMV.
03-14-2011, 04:49 AM
#6
Part Time Employee
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
Posts: 1,918
Originally Posted by 4A2B
Just a little side note, with the current reserve manning (or lack of), if you list sick on any R-day, you have a pretty good chance of getting leveled either way. If you happen to be sick for a long block on a mini-rlg you have a good chance of already being leveled for the full amount of your mini-rlg before you trigger the "sick for all of the days rule".
Personally I would prefer to see us go to a sick pay for each r day, I have been hit for a 72 hour trip when I was only sick for 3 days of a 15 day stretch and I have a real hard time doing make up sick. Reserve pilots want and deserve higher pay per day, I think getting docked sick time would be better if it was also done on a r day for r day basis. I have never made out on the lottery of not being charged, which is the golden nugget that many view as the advantage in the sick reserve policy. YMMV.
), if you list sick on any R-day, you have a pretty good chance of getting leveled either way. If you happen to be sick for a long block on a mini-rlg you have a good chance of already being leveled for the full amount of your mini-rlg before you trigger the "sick for all of the days rule".Personally I would prefer to see us go to a sick pay for each r day, I have been hit for a 72 hour trip when I was only sick for 3 days of a 15 day stretch and I have a real hard time doing make up sick. Reserve pilots want and deserve higher pay per day, I think getting docked sick time would be better if it was also done on a r day for r day basis. I have never made out on the lottery of not being charged, which is the golden nugget that many view as the advantage in the sick reserve policy. YMMV.
This still does not answer why we would "codify current practice", by adding mini-RLG, when it is a violation of the CBA.
03-14-2011, 05:25 AM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Posts: 556
Originally Posted by MaxKts
Recently, I have been sick for all but 2 days of a 5 week bid month and only leveled for 10.5 hrs. I guess it depends on the a/c and seat you are in.
This still does not answer why we would "codify current practice", by adding mini-RLG, when it is a violation of the CBA.
This still does not answer why we would "codify current practice", by adding mini-RLG, when it is a violation of the CBA.
Even if it is "new" language, it is part of the TA no matter what and will be the case going forward, whether we like it or not if passed. I just don't see the issue being debatable anymore, either it is in or out and ALPA says it is already being done this way. If the TA fails, and it happens to you, I suggest you file a grievance if you feel it is a violation and don't let ALPA talk you out of it, it is your right to file.
As to leveling, it does depend on seat, base and other variables which are in constant flux here. I have also been fortunate to have never been out sick for that many days in a reserve month so have only had the other experience, getting nailed for a monster trip when out a short period of time.
03-14-2011, 05:28 AM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,224
I am specifically talking about a custom or secondary line that consists of both R days and trips.
I did read the grievance settlement, but this individual had a month consisting entirely of R days.
This has to be a change, even though the union says it codifies current practice. Another give back.
I did read the grievance settlement, but this individual had a month consisting entirely of R days.
This has to be a change, even though the union says it codifies current practice. Another give back.
03-14-2011, 05:37 AM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 425
4a2b, you are correct in more ways than one ............... it is ridiculous that we accept being hit against our sick banks for an entire trip, when calling in sick and being able to come back well, prior to end of that trip assignment, while on reserve.
Also, minimum pay per day, would be a far better deal for all of us, but there are those in power that do not and will not recognize it !!!
Also, minimum pay per day, would be a far better deal for all of us, but there are those in power that do not and will not recognize it !!!
03-14-2011, 06:35 AM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: MD-11 Captain
Posts: 4,304
Sick leave was once a (possible) good deal.
Call in sick on Reserve, wouldn't have been used and get NO DEDUCTION from your sick bank. The first ALPA contract gave back "unless you are sick for the entire month" (in which case your sick bank will be charged RLG). Now the company is coming after mini-RLG.
This is DEFINITELY a give back!!! And another example of our slowing worsening working conditions (work rules).
Call in sick on Reserve, wouldn't have been used and get NO DEDUCTION from your sick bank. The first ALPA contract gave back "unless you are sick for the entire month" (in which case your sick bank will be charged RLG). Now the company is coming after mini-RLG.
This is DEFINITELY a give back!!! And another example of our slowing worsening working conditions (work rules).
