FedEx "buy up lines" ***BEWARE***
08-11-2014, 11:58 AM
#1
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Posts: 94
FedEx "buy up lines" ***BEWARE***
For the August B757 Bidpack, the first 10 R24 lines were to be paid at WideBody pay rates for all flying in the Aug bid month. Lines 8001-8010 were those lines. If you are a FLEX, FPS, TAA, or in any other "Pay Only" status you do not qualify for those lines and "YOU WILL NOT BE PAID AT WIDE BODY PAY RATES". Prior to bidding one of these lines several of us talked to the SIG and ALPA contract Admin to clarify which lines were the "buy up" lines and assured we would be paid WB pay as per the contractual agreement for the 767 ratios, this did not happen.
Like most lessons learned as an airline pilot, several of us learned this by losing pay.
CAVEAT EMPTOR
Like most lessons learned as an airline pilot, several of us learned this by losing pay.
CAVEAT EMPTOR
08-11-2014, 04:48 PM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Gear Monkey
Posts: 3,191
Originally Posted by Coffee *****
For the August B757 Bidpack, the first 10 R24 lines were to be paid at WideBody pay rates for all flying in the Aug bid month. Lines 8001-8010 were those lines. If you are a FLEX, FPS, TAA, or in any other "Pay Only" status you do not qualify for those lines and "YOU WILL NOT BE PAID AT WIDE BODY PAY RATES". Prior to bidding one of these lines several of us talked to the SIG and ALPA contract Admin to clarify which lines were the "buy up" lines and assured we would be paid WB pay as per the contractual agreement for the 767 ratios, this did not happen.
Like most lessons learned as an airline pilot, several of us learned this by losing pay.
CAVEAT EMPTOR
Like most lessons learned as an airline pilot, several of us learned this by losing pay.
CAVEAT EMPTOR
However, when one bids a line "pay only" it really only reflects the "hour value" of that line ---- you don't actually hold that line
In fact, that line is still available for another junior, non-"pay only" pilot to hold.
If all of these 10 lines were first awarded to "pay only" pilots, and then subsequently awarded to 10 junior line holders --- the company would be paying 20 pilots at the WB rates
Was that the intent?
Once again, getting bad info from the SIG or ALPA Contract Enforcement is never good.
08-11-2014, 07:52 PM
#3
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2014
Posts: 55
Originally Posted by DLax85
If you were given incorrect information on those lines that's wrong
However, when one bids a line "pay only" it really only reflects the "hour value" of that line ---- you don't actually hold that line
In fact, that line is still available for another junior, non-"pay only" pilot to hold.
If all of these 10 lines were first awarded to "pay only" pilots, and then subsequently awarded to 10 junior line holders --- the company would be paying 20 pilots at the WB rates
Was that the intent?
Once again, getting bad info from the SIG or ALPA Contract Enforcement is never good.
However, when one bids a line "pay only" it really only reflects the "hour value" of that line ---- you don't actually hold that line
In fact, that line is still available for another junior, non-"pay only" pilot to hold.
If all of these 10 lines were first awarded to "pay only" pilots, and then subsequently awarded to 10 junior line holders --- the company would be paying 20 pilots at the WB rates
Was that the intent?
Once again, getting bad info from the SIG or ALPA Contract Enforcement is never good.
08-12-2014, 04:25 AM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Gear Monkey
Posts: 3,191
If an LCA is awarded one of these lines in a "Pay Only" month in which he's giving check rides is he being paid WB rates?
....and please remind me again what the "FPS" and "TAA" positions are...??
....and please remind me again what the "FPS" and "TAA" positions are...??
08-12-2014, 04:54 AM
#6
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Posts: 94
Originally Posted by DLax85
If an LCA is awarded one of these lines in a "Pay Only" month in which he's giving check rides is he being paid WB rates?
....and please remind me again what the "FPS" and "TAA" positions are...??
....and please remind me again what the "FPS" and "TAA" positions are...??
B767 LOA, paragraph C.2.b "Pilots awarded such R24 lines shall be considered B767 pilots for purposes of all pay purposes for that bid period, including carry-in."
You be the judge, I'm very interested to know how others "interpret" the B767 LOA. I've written it off as BOHICA, standard.
08-12-2014, 05:01 AM
#7
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2014
Posts: 55
Originally Posted by Coffee *****
2011 CBA Section 9, Paragraph E, FPS = Flight Project Specialist (what we refer to as flight test pilots). TAA = Technical Advisor/Aircraft (what we refer to as Tech Pilots).
B767 LOA, paragraph C.2.b "Pilots awarded such R24 lines shall be considered B767 pilots for purposes of all pay purposes for that bid period, including carry-in."
You be the judge, I'm very interested to know how others "interpret" the B767 LOA. I've written it off as BOHICA, standard.
B767 LOA, paragraph C.2.b "Pilots awarded such R24 lines shall be considered B767 pilots for purposes of all pay purposes for that bid period, including carry-in."
You be the judge, I'm very interested to know how others "interpret" the B767 LOA. I've written it off as BOHICA, standard.
08-12-2014, 05:31 AM
#8
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Posts: 94
For now, I'm giving the company the benefit of the doubt by assuming the crew pay system is not automated to sort this situation out by seniority #. I've also notified the ALPA reps who informed me of their interpretation of the LOA and many are looking into this issue affecting several of us in Pay Only status. Before we cry subterfuge and toss our reps under the bus, I'm willing to let this play out it's course. That's my view at this point, call me weak and throw spears but I'll let the system figure out the final outcome and go from there.
08-12-2014, 05:38 AM
#9
Part Time Employee
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
Posts: 1,918
Originally Posted by Coffee *****
For now, I'm giving the company the benefit of the doubt by assuming the crew pay system is not automated to sort this situation out by seniority #. I've also notified the ALPA reps who informed me of their interpretation of the LOA and many are looking into this issue affecting several of us in Pay Only status. Before we cry subterfuge and toss our reps under the bus, I'm willing to let this play out it's course. That's my view at this point, call me weak and throw spears but I'll let the system figure out the final outcome and go from there.
You start out with -the company is screwing us again - and now you are saying you hope it is an oversight! All you have done is stir up the masses and now then tell them to take a chill pill! Dang it man we want to burn someone at the stake
08-12-2014, 05:45 AM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Gear Monkey
Posts: 3,191
I'm no Company or ALPA apologist, and I think this comes down to the interpretation of the words "awarded", "all" and "pay"
Given the company publishes "Monthly
Bid Awards" and all pilots see VIPS screens that state "You've been awarded line XXX", the definition of "awarded" is clearly established by long term precedent.
While the chance the company may have to pay twice the number of WB lines in the 757 then they intended, the verbiage is quite clear.
And the power to reverse this unintended consequence is easy
The Company can simply properly man the 767, so the flight hour ratios do not generate these R24 WB lines
I think an arbitrator would rule in our favor and agree it should be aggressively grieved.
Given the company publishes "Monthly
Bid Awards" and all pilots see VIPS screens that state "You've been awarded line XXX", the definition of "awarded" is clearly established by long term precedent.
While the chance the company may have to pay twice the number of WB lines in the 757 then they intended, the verbiage is quite clear.
And the power to reverse this unintended consequence is easy
The Company can simply properly man the 767, so the flight hour ratios do not generate these R24 WB lines
I think an arbitrator would rule in our favor and agree it should be aggressively grieved.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
