Search

Notices
Cargo Part 121 cargo airlines

FDX PVG deviation?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-16-2012 | 11:52 PM
  #21  
MD11Fr8Dog's Avatar
...Whatever It Is!
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,680
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by FDXLAG
Concur, if we are already using jumpseats why would the company use some of their "negotiating capital" to change a policy that is already working in their favor.
To schedule the DH on jumpseat and completely eliminate that "accepted fare"?
Reply
Old 12-17-2012 | 07:42 PM
  #22  
FLMD11CAPT's Avatar
Ok, No more sleeping Dog
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
From: MD-11, F/O
Question

Originally Posted by AFW_MD11
exactly my point.

FLMD11CAPT - yes - illogical - you need to read & understand the CBA - your comments (illogical scenarios) indicate that you haven't read the CBA and/or don't understand the process at all.
Read it.....even contributed some of it. I do agree with above posts that this will eventually be voted on along with the rest of the proposed TA, but by that time all the heavy lifting will have been done by the NC at the table and our vote will be on the best pakage TA they could procure. Part of that will be "Deadheading". My point here is simply that our current position and leverage there is fairly strong given the egregious evidence we can present on the Co playing it fast and loose with accepted fares, class of service, Check- ins and deviations. Giving the Co any advantage in bargaining position by voluntarily using Co dh's in lieu of scheduled ones gives them a documented argument that we "like" that , which is difficult for the NC to refute since WE DO IT. Thus some of the well needed improvements in the DH section can be diluted by the Co. With their demand of more DHing on Co AC. Nes' Pa?
Reply
Old 12-17-2012 | 08:21 PM
  #23  
The Walrus's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
From: Socket Drawer
Default

I agree that Flmd is confused. They cannot use actions of some pilots to use the jumpseat during a mid trip dh to force us to make that the norm. DHing is part of our contract, just as the right to deviate via company dh is also a right. Volunteering for flts for time and a half is a right, but they can't make us do it. Should guys not bid to train on a day off because they might make it mandatory on the next contract? Should guys not save some of their vacation to take advantage of vacation buyback, maybe we do not need that vacation. Should guys never turn down sub, maybe the company might decide to just drop your trip and tell you to make it up if it is canceled since some guys elect to decline sub and put it into their makeup bank.

What if no one ever deviated from a mid trip dh. We would probably lose the choice of ever deviate under you opinion.

Good thing you don't work on the NC or the Grievance Committee.
Reply
Old 12-18-2012 | 08:40 AM
  #24  
AFW_MD11's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,098
Likes: 0
From: MD11 FO, ANC
Default

Originally Posted by FLMD11CAPT
Thus some of the well needed improvements in the DH section can be diluted by the Co. With their demand of more DHing on Co AC. Nes' Pa?
Didn't know what this meant, so I Googled it - that's what I do when I don't understand something - research & ask questions in order to be as fully informed as possible - try it some time

so...... no, I don't agree - still not a logical train of thought - the company can't "demand" anything of us that is outside their contractual right to do so - even when we choose to "do it to ourselves"

(unless they negotiate said change to our CBA and we collectively agree/ratify & allow those changes - different from the company "demanding" or "imposing" it on us)

What does Nes' Pa mean? - WebAnswers.com
Reply
Old 12-18-2012 | 01:38 PM
  #25  
Nitefrater's Avatar
gets every day off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
From: Retired MD11 Capt
Default

Originally Posted by AFW_MD11
Didn't know what this meant, so I Googled it - that's what I do when I don't understand something - research & ask questions in order to be as fully informed as possible - try it some time
You DO realize that this conduct is so far outside the norm on this board that it's possible you could get banned for it?
Reply
Old 12-20-2012 | 11:41 PM
  #26  
TonyC's Avatar
Organizational Learning 
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,948
Likes: 0
From: Directly behind the combiner
Default

Originally Posted by FLMD11CAPT

.....they will just stick us on Co. J/S's........and cite our own actions as precedent.



Read the above......any time you utilize Co. J/S in lieu of a deadhead (Front, Mid or back end) you are conceeding our DH policy in the contract.....

I wonder if you ever operated into Anchorage, and then took a company jumpseat to Memphis and then Jacksonville without an intervening legal rest period.

(That's not true. I don't wonder. I know you did it.)


Do you suppose The Company could have surmised from your behavior that it did not need to honor the contractual limits for duty and the contractual requirements for rest? In fact, do you suppose that they might have inferred that the FAR limits are far too restrictive for you because you worked your way from Osaka to Jacksonville with no legal rest? Did you set a precedent for throwing out our CBA duty and rest rules?

What about those times you end a trip in Memphis and hop on the jumpseat without a legal rest period? Do you suppose that works against us, too?


Sure, make everyone think you're the model of perfection -- that gives you the right to criticize the actions of others, doesn't it?


Does the word hypocrisy pop into anybody else's mind?


Originally Posted by FLMD11CAPT

.....yes you are going against the "Union thing", what is perplexing is you do it cause otherwise you are "inconvenienced".


What "Union thing"? The one you just made up?

This "Union" couldn't possibly engage in any activity which might be slightly construed as confrontational. We solve our problems by trying to solve The Company's problems, or we just deal with them. That's the SIG way.

===============================
Jim Rucks has known now for over a week that the arbitrator upheld his firing for just cause. When do you suppose our "Union thang" leaders -- cough, cough, gag -- will be informing the membership?


DUDE -- (attempting to speak in your language, and the language of your buddy the MEC Sec-Treas) -- leave the guy alone who's trying to make his transportation to Shanghai more pleasant. You're barking up the wrong tree.


Merry Christmas






.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
pig on the wing
Cargo
3
09-20-2012 10:18 AM
vagabond
Cargo
83
07-14-2010 07:27 AM
Airbusdriver
Cargo
5
08-15-2009 09:34 AM
XJGuy
Cargo
4
10-17-2008 05:37 AM
nightfreight
Cargo
12
03-11-2008 03:06 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices