CB,

Is it true that you are going to be flying our new 757's? Someone told that to me the other day and I was wondering how a fairly new guy like you, gets that really great opportunity? Was that done out of some sort of posting? I just don't remember seeing anything about that. Please advise.

 

CB is a very talented aviator, has some experience from another airline on the 757/767, and no...the job wasn't posted...I don't think.

I'm making some calls today... I've championed our union for years and will continue to do so, but we need to keep some things out in the open.

 

Is it true that you are going to be flying our new 757's? ..........CB is a very talented aviator, has some experience from another airline on the 757/767 .....So after all this talk from you about full and open disclosure, is it really true you're getting a training deal that was unannounced? Say it aint so Biitch, say it aint so!

 

I dont care if they make him SCP; I want to know what my union did and why they did it. It aint about biitch anymore. I thought senority was the golden rule.

LAG

 

............................................

 

Hey JetJok ... in case you haven't noticed this place is FULL of special good deals for a select few. I've never liked it much ... I guess I'm not in the "brother-in-law bubba club". But if I was, well then, it would be OK with me to get one of those good deals ... sort of like CBitch

 

My point exactly. Regardless of seniority, or filling a vacancy with a real posting? I don't especially like it either, but it goes on and we all know it. But in this particular case, it sounds like the company screwed up and CB has taken it upon himself to point it out to the rest of the world. No problem. But maybe he should lighten up a bit, seeing as how he's getting a good deal at the expense of someone else who might have had equal or better credentials, and been here longer, and thusly earned it more.

Don't misunderstand my position: I'm glad that we've found someone with previous 757 experience, and flight test at that. However, since this goes on, and everyone knows (especially CB) it goes on, than maybe he shouldn't ***** quite so much when it happens for/to someone else. Seems to me that the company screwed up. I'd prefer that they somehow undo what's been done for him, recoup the monies paid, and be done with it. After all, seniority IS seniority (and a contract is a contract.) As well, our union should be forthcoming with a valid explanation of all that's transpired. I've got a call in to them, in the hopes that someone will come clean.

 

Two problems one finally has answers.

1) Demeaning, condescending, lack of respectful timely correspondence between the union and our JR members. OPEN ITEM.

2) Passover Pay. After a period of weeks and no answers from ALPA, I spoke with John Hunt in FedEx Contract Administration. He got me in touch with Len Kelly (ACP) who was the grievance chairman until recently and is knowledgeable of the situation. I will attempt to explain but I refer you to him for answers and if I make a mistake in transferring the information it is my mistake. Although I don’t agree with some of the unions actions/methods in this situation I appreciate Capt Kelly explaining and answering EVERY SINGLE QUESTION I asked. The union has chosen to give the JR guys the Heisman for weeks now and Capt Kelly did their work in about 20 min. Thanks Capt Kelly.

It has been the company’s practice to cancel a pilots bid only if he is awarded a new bid and he has not started training. In the case of the same aircraft and seat and only a “Base Transfer” the pilot has kept his “older” bid. So even though many of us held the same aircraft, seat, and domicile of the JR pilot; the precedent has been set for him to retain his old bid and therefore go to training before the senior pilots. Len is researching where in the contract “Base Transfer” is addressed. This is where I disagree, in my opinion it is a Grey area and I am surprised the union chose to not consider our argument or address the argument with us prior to a settlement.

For those SR pilots who did hold an ANC MD-11 bid, the company offered a monetary compensation to resolve the issue vice Grieve the issue. The union weighed all the factors in the case including cost and the two parties agreed on a monetary compensation for those ANC pilots from bid 05-03. It was a very small number of pilots when compared to the pilots on 06-03 who feel like training occurred out of seniority.

In the old case involving Grievance 02-02 (727 SO who had a DC-10 SO bid but never went to training because the company removed his DC-10 SO bid when he was awarded a MD-11 FO bid), that person apparently did receive some monetary compensation but the union chose to include his “intervening award” clarification in the recent resolution and therefore negates those of us who were removed from receiving pay for a seat in which you bid out of prior to training. (sorry for the run-on lengthy sentence but I am doing my best).

I felt like many of the problems associated with this controversial issue (including this Thread) could have been avoided with better communication. I suggested that prior to the resolution the union could have contacted all of us possibly involved, explained the situation, and possible paths of action. We agreed to disagree on this point because the union believes what I proposed was not feasibly possible. We have had almost 4,000 hits on this thread in 3 days. I personally think it would have been possible. But the bottom line is our union officials represent us, and we elected them, so whatever path they choose we have to live with it. If you disagree, vote differently or volunteer to do union work and make a difference.

 

ALPA should poll the membership on the passover pay issue. I suggest the best course would be calculate the amount that passover pay costs the company. The company and ALPA should split the savings with the ALPA portion going to the top 80% of the list.

 

I'm not even sure what you're getting at here but I have a better idea: Let's enforce the contract. If you are due passover, then you should get it, if not, sorry--no cash for you. I think that's all that's expected.