Busboy

The OP's situation was not a mistake. This practice is pretty common on many flights I've been booked on. And, I'm not on VTOs. You think it's a mistake that we're booked on scheduled Europe D/H fits through PHL, that are often booked in coach, because first class(business) seats are not available? But, if I deviate, I can find dozens of ways to get there in business. Of course, the accepted fare doesn't cover those flights. Because the PHL connection 1st class flights are so much cheaper. Even though they're not available.

It's not a mistake. It's cost cutting.

Do you really think that there could not be language written into the CBA that required them to look for flights that DO have 1st class seats available?

Mark2792

I just want all of you to know that I voted NO on this contract.

[PS: Leo, you need to learn how to land an airplane.....]

TonyC

I guess they've been too busy booking my 25 Dec 5+00 Block hour trip to MEX. :-/






.

FDXLAG

Who are they going to fine and who are they going to reward?

"I then discovered that scheduling had failed to ticket me after the VTO release. Hence, a last minute emergency booking on a busy travel day and a revised pairing that transited ORD."

Ok sounds like a mistake to me but I'll take your word for it.

"The Company shall ensure that Corporate Travel (or any subsequent Company designated travel administrator) attempts to secure first class seating at the earliest practical point in the planning process. If Corporate Travel is unable to book first class at the time the initial booking is made, Corporate Travel shall notify the pilot who is awarded that trip, via e-mail, of the unavailability of first class."

I am not sure how we eliminate American or United from our list of carriers just because they have cheap fares to Europe.

AnyMouse

"All scheduled deadheads before the first operating duty period of a scheduled bid pack pairing which rate a higher class of service must be scheduled on a commercial flight which actually has a higher class of service cabin, if such a flight exists which arrives during the window from 18 to 42 hours prior to the showtime of the first operating duty period. [INTENT: A deadhead flight which arrives less than 18 hours prior to the showtime of the first operating period is permissible only if it contains a higher class of service cabin, or no such flight exists which arrives between that flight's arrival and 42 hours prior to the showtime.]

All scheduled deadheads after the final operating duty period of a scheduled bid pack pairing which rate a higher class of service must be scheduled on a commercial flight which actually has a higher class of service cabin, if such a flight exists which departs after a legal layover or within 36 hours of the end of the final operating duty period.

All scheduled deadheads which rate a higher class of service shall be booked within 48 hours of initial assignment to a specific pilot."

This would at least prevent them from chasing a lower class of service. If a first class cabin is full, that happens. But at least they can't easily avoid it completely with Southwest flights, etc.

busdriver12

Okay, this is totally off topic, but it kind of meshes because it's eye opening what they do to your schedule sometimes.

So yesterday, everyone is crazy busy because it's the day after Cyber Monday. Massive delays in the system. I was watching what happened to a friend's pairing out of morbid curiosity. The duty day was extended greatly, due to these delays, but funny thing, when it looked like it was going to be over 14+30, they changed the enroute block time on the estimate, to be 10 minutes less than the scheduled pairing, so it was less than 14+30.

The minute they blocked out, they revised the enroute block time to be 30 minutes longer. A little while later, apparently when they realized that the layover time was going to be less than 8 hours, they revised the enroute block time estimate to be two minutes less, so it would be over 8 hours.

Now of course, your real enroute time is going to be whatever it actually is. But I found it odd, this constant micromanaging of the scheduled block time to keep the appearance of the duty day to be less than 14+30 (FAR extension) until they blocked out, then revising it to give the minimum legal show. Seems kind of devious. What would be the reason for this?

Busboy

Huh...Wow...That's odd. I wonder why they failed to ticket him? You don't suppose there were no 1st class seats available on the originally scheduled deadhead? Maybe it was a mistake. Guess we'll never know.

Really? I'm not advocating eliminating American or United from our list of carriers. I'm advocating the elimination of our company's practice of intentionally scheduling us on deadheads that aren't available or don't meet the intent of our agreement, when there are other flights that would meet the higher class parameters.

StarClipper

[QUOTE=Albief15;2019246]I know it sucks. I don't have all the answers. I do know my HKG-SIN and NRT-HKG trips now provide business seats both ways, and the bank is about 4-5 times what is was two months ago, which gives me a lot more travel options.

Not mocking your situation. I am just pointing out there are some improvements for some of us as well. I guess it will be up to us individually to be proactive and lead turn getting our seats, which I know isn't perfect.[/QUOTE

Another disappointing post from Albie15, I would never have taken you for the selfish type but after your long post in support of the TA and now this, I'm starting to wonder if your true color is coming out. I hope I'm wrong because I had a lot if respect for you.

Albief15

I am just pointing out that for all the gloom and doom and angst about the contract, there ARE some wins in here for SOME of our pilots. Considering the fact EVERY trip in Asia starts with a DH, and the rather uncomfortable coach seating on some international carriers, the business class for 2.5 hours or more was a win for some of the pilot group.
So...if I let you down, sorry. Just because someone posts on APC that "this contract had nothing but givebacks..." does not make it the truth. There are some benefits for some of the pilot group.

As far as "loss or respect", give me a ******** break. I am about 1% of APC that is actually known, and I have never hid my identity. Maybe you are a senior ANC captain, or a new hire who my company helped get hired. As it is...you could also be a 12 year old in his PJs in the basement, and I certainly don't give a rat's ass who you are. I don't have any idea. If you want to email me in VIPS I'm not hard to find if you want to let me know what I disappointment I turned out to be.

Nobody gave two ****s about me and the FO crowd when the retirement age spiked up. Some of the folks who post here regularly supported the original FDA LOA, which had zero education allowance, a $2300 housing subsidy, and the ability to send pilots non-voluntarily abroad for 90 straight days. This contract had substantial improvements for the FDA crowd. The moving bank has tremendous value for all commuters. The OP *****ed about riding coach one way to Anchorage, about 5 hours. Two months ago my trip would have had 2 4 + hour rides in coach, and again....we DH on EVERY trip in the FDA. For 120+ pilots, not just me, the improvements here were real and tangible. I've seen pictures of PR, recently retired "full sized" former F-15 driver and 777 captain, jammed in coach on an intra-Asia flight. 777 guys and MD11 guys also benefit from the new DH parameters. The empathy I had for the OP was real, because dammit that is what commuting was like here EVERY trip until the new TA.

You may never know how how much you could or could not have gotten on this last TA. What I will tell you is I never saw the company EVER come back and sweeten the deal when the 777 override died on the vine. They never came back after the postal bid LOA didn't go their way. Perhaps they would have crawled on their knees back to us this round. Considering the fact I have pilots who have left Delta, American, and Southwest in the last 6 months to come here, I am not sure the FDAs would have gone unfilled, nor the schedules been cancelled. Look around the AOC. Do you think those Atlas pilots "assisting" our efforts and other pilots would have turned around and gone home if we hadn't reached a TA? Do you think they would have flown another 10, 20, or 30% more even if it was above the scope limit per our contract and subject to scope penalty payments? Maybe we could have ruined peak. Maybe we could have just enjoyed our time off and racked up some scope penalty money while the operation continued to function, albeit at a less efficient rate. I was not scared to strike. I was scared that we would never, never, never be released and spend 2-3 years in negotiations purgatory that would offer very little extra monetary benefit.

Contracts, business, and negotiations are full of trade offs. This TA had a bunch of things that benefited many pilots. It also failed to reach some goals. I didn't go out and campaign for this TA...I wrote one letter based on my experience watching the negotiations from the perspective of someone who had been involved in the past. I shared my opinion at the HKG road show. That's it. I didn't write letters, campaign, or make phone calls. I voted, and respected my colleagues to do the same. I was ready to move forward regardless of whether or not it passed. My caution--and only concern--was that turning it down with the expectation of getting more later was not going to provide a fast resolution. I was also concerned it might not provide a solution that was considerably more lucrative. I may have been wrong. 57% were similarly pragmatic. I don't think that makes them selfish, but rather just guys and gals who had to choose between two less than perfect options.

I wasn't trying to screw anyone. I was trying to keep guys from getting screwed with false expectations. And while the OP in this thread complains about a 1-off bad deal, that would be "standard ops" for everyone operating internationally on flights less than 5 hours until we got the new deal.

TonyC

Explain how you came to this conclusion, that nobody gave two asterisks about you. Maybe you would have preferred to let the law be written the original way so The Company could go in and change our normal retirement age to 65, and make you work to 65 to get your full retirement benefit? Maybe you would have preferred that pilots already retired be allowed to come back and get their seniority numbers and push you back down the list? Hey, I know it sucked. But I don't think many people realize how much worse the law would have sucked before ALPA's inputs were incorporated.


Will it always be now that you feel like nobody cared about you then, so you're justified in not caring about anybody else but yourself?



What we had before the original FDA LOA was CBA Section 6 move which had no education allowance, no monthly housing susbsidy, and none of the other benefits in the FDA LOA. (You did use the tickets to get your family over there, right? The orientation and real estate assistance? How about housing for the first 30 days? Did you get deposit assistance to get your lease started? How about the $10,000 dollars just for going there? None of those benefits existed before the original FDA LOA.) You harp on the 90-day STV, but you agreed that you would support a 30-day limit on inverse STV until we got a 30-day limit on inverse STV. The membership didn't vote on a 90-day limit on inverse STV, because the change was made before the vote. SO, the original ratified LOA didn't have a 90-day inverse STV.

And all of that was negotiated outside of RLA Section 6, when we didn't have an under-manned peak looming.




Apples and porcupines.

Neither of those occurred during RLA Section 6 negotiations.

You can be thankful the "USPS Contract" LOA didn't go their way and you don't have to work an additional 48 TAFB at straight time (that's 4 Out & Backs, not 2 days). Enjoy those days off. Oh, and enjoy the extra jobs (and interview preps) that produced.

The B-777 Override LOA didn't die on the vine -- it was poisoned by The Company's invocation of §4.A.2.b. To add insult to injury, the override negotiated in the current CBA falls far short of what was negotiated in that LOA.



If The Company could hire more charters, they would, because we STILL don't have enough lift to make it through peak, even with the AVA spigots wide open. I had a VP on my jumpseat tonight lamenting that we have more freight than we can handle, and charters were cancelling due to maintenance issues. Scope penalty payments are irrelevant at this point -- they need all the lift they can find.

I'm sick and tired of hearing, we would never be released to strike. So what!? We didn't need to strike to have an effect. We had already withdrawn our goodwill, we didn't need to withdraw our services. Why do you think The Company came off their stance of delay, delay, delay in the first place?





You've made it very clear this CBA works for you, personally.

That's nice.






.