C100 VBs
07-05-2017, 06:43 PM
#251
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,522
Originally Posted by sailingfun
...home basing which is what we're talking about was a item mentioned in the contract surveys as a item some pilots want.
The ultimate would be 100% home based, with to and from full pay and duty.
07-05-2017, 07:48 PM
#252
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,504
Originally Posted by sailingfun
We agreed to give it a trial. We should do that. If it's a big negative then let it expire. It may benefit some pilots. The question is is the benefit greater than the job loss. It's worth noting that home basing which is what we're talking about was a item mentioned in the contract surveys as a item some pilots want.
07-06-2017, 03:32 AM
#253
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,117
Originally Posted by notEnuf
No, we agreed to give them THIS year to try it. Language my friend, language.
You are correct that Section 4.A. of MOU #16-03 expressly states:
"This MOU will become effective on its date of signing and will remain in effect for a period of one year following December 1, 2016 unless extended by agreement of the parties."
That all seems clear until you read the latest Negotiators' Notepad (17-09) which was emailed on June 14, 2017. In the table at the bottom of that NN, you will see that the "Temporary and Virtual Basing" MOU is "Deferred Effective Date No Later Than" of 01-31-2018. Obviously something happened between the MOU signing date (December 1, 2016) and the publishing of NN 17-09, right? Nope...
Go back and look at MOU #16-02 ("Deferred Implementation") which, in theory, came into existence prior to MOU #16-03. NN 17-09 is merely a "cut and paste" of MOU #16-02 with regard to non-implemented provisions.
So, MOU #16-02 expressly states that the "Temporary and Virtual Basing" MOU has a "Deferred Effective Date No Later Than" of 01-31-2018 while the sequentially later MOU #16-03 expressly states that the MOU became effective on December 1, 2016 and is to remain in effect for a period of 1 year from December 1, 2016 unless extended by agreement of the parties. If MOU #16-02 was the true intent of the parties, why does MOU #16-03 contain the language it does in 4.A? Seems likely that the Negotiating Committee (with the "help" of DALPA Legal) screwed up and got sloppy at the end. I would bet the 01/31/2018 date was the one envisioned all along and poor drafting was to blame for the duration language found in MOU #16-03.
The Negotiating Committee should put out a clarification (mea culpa?) letter on this obvious contradiction.
07-06-2017, 07:02 AM
#254
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Position: stake holder ir.delta.com
Posts: 10,033
I think we all suspect ALPA will honor delayed implementation. I say we push the issue and see how the litigation plays out. The level of response will indicate the true desire of the company. If they let it go, fine. If they fight for a hearing, then we know they have plans to expand this practice and there is real value in the VBs and TDY for them.
Saddly, I don't think there is the will.
Intent v. language, how does that usually work out for the pilots?
And the company?
Saddly, I don't think there is the will.
Intent v. language, how does that usually work out for the pilots?
And the company?
06-21-2018, 07:58 PM
#257
Holding
Joined APC: Aug 2017
Position: Bus Driver
Posts: 126
06-22-2018, 07:01 AM
#260
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: Fastest Hunk of Junk in the Galaxy
Posts: 1,657
Originally Posted by G4IND
Originally Posted by FL370esq
Kind of a "moo" point now that the MEC has pulled down the VB LOA, isn't it? Those who bid it trying to get to an AUS VB will find themselves sadly disappointed. ��
