Notices

MEC Chairman letter

Old 02-27-2021, 07:30 AM
  #41  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2014
Posts: 119
Default

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44 View Post
I laughed at the spin of how an ALPA guy now helping company screw us via his contract admin position could be a positive. The letter scares me. I have no faith in our new chairman. Another 2 years and done.
This should terrify all of us. The fox is in the henhouse and our MEC chairman supports it.
Eddiewouldgo is offline  
Old 02-27-2021, 07:49 AM
  #42  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: 767 Capt.
Posts: 64
Default Contract violations?

Scheduling is definitely behind the power curve but contract violations hasn’t been my experience. December and January, however, resulted in 4 Greenslips in a row. I’m good with that. Filled the 401k in one check. Bring it on.
Taildragger1 is offline  
Old 02-27-2021, 09:33 AM
  #43  
Gets Weekends Off
 
JamesBond's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2015
Position: A350 Both
Posts: 7,292
Default

Originally Posted by RonRicco View Post
Ok. Does the same apply to Scope? Just let them violate it and get paid later?
​​​
The majority of the posts I have seen over the years say we want them to “honor the contract” and “stop illegal reroutes” and “they were not supposed to do that to me.”

We need to be consistent. Do we want them to honor the contract (QOL) or are we ok just getting paid off for not doing it?
Vastly underrated post right here^^^^^^^^^. Getting 'paid' for scope violations is beyond idiotic. Scope violations should carry punitive damages that are immediate and permanent.


Edit: and what I mean by punitive is that the 'balance' of what has been violated should come to our side of the ledger, immediately.... and that should be permanent.

Last edited by JamesBond; 02-27-2021 at 10:04 AM.
JamesBond is offline  
Old 02-27-2021, 09:58 AM
  #44  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Sep 2015
Position: 3+ hour sit in the ATL
Posts: 1,982
Default

Originally Posted by Herkflyr View Post
We already have a good example of this, and have for years. It's called PBS. The company staffs the airline, publishes the bid packages and runs PBS.

THEN they pass the preliminary bid awards to ALPA for review and approval. Often times ALPA will reject the bid run and say "do over." Eventually all awards are approved and posted.

Using the logic of the naysayers, we should just let the company run whatever PBS solution they wish, tell the pilots to eat the sh!t sandwich, then do a post award review and award penalty pay to any pilot harmed through a bad award.

No thanks. I'd rather have a better life on a constant basis, than perhaps get an occasional bonus payment (weeks or months later) amidst scheduling shortcomings. If ALPA is part of a greater overall operation, that's not a bad thing either.
Couldn't agree with you more.
Drum is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Kayco
United
190
08-07-2022 12:19 PM
YXnot
Major
1077
02-18-2011 09:17 PM
Pinchanickled
Regional
33
12-17-2010 06:58 PM
WatchThis!
Mergers and Acquisitions
2
04-14-2008 07:25 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices