More PWA Violations
10-13-2018, 04:57 PM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,503
Originally Posted by JamesBond
I don't hang on every email that comes from DALPA. Sorry. Call me ig'nant if you'd like, but I would venture that a lot of people don't either. But thank you for the update.
10-14-2018, 06:29 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,110
Originally Posted by JamesBond
Well that is nice. What is the violation?
Korean flies one flight per day from Japan to Honolulu. That flight was missed by Flight Ops I guess when the JV percentages were calculated. I guess 99.9% of the flights we JV with Korean are in and out of Seoul. It resulted in a violation of the PWA by the company.
Sounds like management and ALPA are going to sit down to discuss remedies.
10-14-2018, 12:28 PM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,262
Originally Posted by marcal
Korean flies one flight per day from Japan to Honolulu. That flight was missed by Flight Ops I guess when the JV percentages were calculated. I guess 99.9% of the flights we JV with Korean are in and out of Seoul. It resulted in a violation of the PWA by the company.
Sounds like management and ALPA are going to sit down to discuss remedies.
Sounds like management and ALPA are going to sit down to discuss remedies.
10-14-2018, 01:12 PM
#16
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,989
Network management runs the airline to (drum roll .... .... .... ....) make money. The fine professionals (and they really are the World's best) don't necessarily know the specifics of our scope section and do not focus on it. Compliance or non-compliance is damn near an after the fact accident.
Eventually, either ALPA or the company will discover what a great idea it would be to have a data nerd calculate compliance on a near real-time basis and brief the company, proactively engaging to achieve compliance (or at least not be surprised). It would take about two to four days a month for some nerd-nobody to run the numbers and report. In fact, I have it on good information that guy does not even want to come to MEC meetings, drink expensive-account booze or have a title. He has been known to drink a White Russian once a year. Too many calories in that delicious beverage to make a habit of it.
Eventually, either ALPA or the company will discover what a great idea it would be to have a data nerd calculate compliance on a near real-time basis and brief the company, proactively engaging to achieve compliance (or at least not be surprised). It would take about two to four days a month for some nerd-nobody to run the numbers and report. In fact, I have it on good information that guy does not even want to come to MEC meetings, drink expensive-account booze or have a title. He has been known to drink a White Russian once a year. Too many calories in that delicious beverage to make a habit of it.
10-14-2018, 06:12 PM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2015
Position: A350 Both
Posts: 7,292
Originally Posted by marcal
Korean flies one flight per day from Japan to Honolulu. That flight was missed by Flight Ops I guess when the JV percentages were calculated. I guess 99.9% of the flights we JV with Korean are in and out of Seoul. It resulted in a violation of the PWA by the company.
Sounds like management and ALPA are going to sit down to discuss remedies.
Sounds like management and ALPA are going to sit down to discuss remedies.
10-15-2018, 08:07 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,456
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
Eventually, either ALPA or the company will discover what a great idea it would be to have a data nerd calculate compliance on a near real-time basis and brief the company, proactively engaging to achieve compliance (or at least not be surprised).
10-15-2018, 08:19 AM
#20
On Reserve
Joined APC: Aug 2016
Posts: 22
There needs to be a harsh penalty add-on to the cost of non-compliance, not just a "make it equal" to what was lost.
A penalty for "trying". If it's just equal, there's no deterrent; in fact it would be a "there's no cost for trying, and if someone catches it, then oh so what it costs the same anyway".
A one-off might, maybe, possibly, happen. But the ongoing pattern of non-compliance is egregious. The only fix is a HARSH cost-for-trying, such that they decide it might be in THEIR best interest to in the future follow the contract.
A penalty for "trying". If it's just equal, there's no deterrent; in fact it would be a "there's no cost for trying, and if someone catches it, then oh so what it costs the same anyway".
A one-off might, maybe, possibly, happen. But the ongoing pattern of non-compliance is egregious. The only fix is a HARSH cost-for-trying, such that they decide it might be in THEIR best interest to in the future follow the contract.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
