The short answer is, technically no, but... ALPA asks us to always go to the company first. To that end, the real point of the Crew Assist case is to "Stop the clock". You have 120 days to officially notify the company of a contract violation, or ALPA cannot get you made whole (aka paid). Though you can stop the clock with a phone call to CS, by 'forcing' you to have a CA case number, ALPA is protecting you. Once the 'clock' is stopped, ALPA has 2 years to pursue payment.

Technicallly, if ALPA scheduing gets to your STS case and sends the company a demand for payment before 120 days, a CA inquiry is not absolutely required. BUT it is not worth the risk, since there have been times where the pile of company violations has been so high, ALPA couldn't adjudicate all the pilots in line in front of you in time.

As I understand, STS is not first come, first served. It's done by 'event date'. Regardless, by doing them both at the same time, it gives ALPA a chance to double check the company. It's to your/my advantage to be as proactive with a second CA case, call to CS, call to CPO, FCR, etc as possible (get paid quickest). STS allows you to update your STS case to include developements along the way. The more you help APLA, the faster they can get to other cases.

 

This should be stickied. Always pursue payment for yourself within 120 days of the incident with the company first, then submit an STS Report if unsuccessful.

 

Just some more info to add. I recently submitted an STS and mentioned I was still waiting to hear from Crew Assist. The ALPA Scheduling rep closed the STS and told me to resubmit after I heard back from the Co if I didn't agree with their response.

 

It does get annoying, especially when you already know the answer. Must make for some slightly comical pay inquires.

“Hi what’s the nature of your complaint?”

”It’s the exact same complaint as my last 3 pay inquires. I know you disagree with the union position and will boiler plate the exact same response, but if I ever want to get paid down the road you and I have to do the exact same dance as the last 3 times. Kindly awaiting your denial.”

There has to be a better way.

 

Yep. And I was surprised at how annoyed I was when the Co denied my claim even though I 100% knew it was going to be denied. Maybe it was the "Thanks and have a great day!" signoff from CA.

 

Dang, you can get a response from the union that quick? I'm still waiting on them to even look at an STS from Mid-December. Generally, my technique is to throw in the STS to get in the queue because I know by the time they get around to looking at it, the company will have denied it a long time ago.

 

He probably submitted an inquiry not a report. But if an inquiry needs research it’ll become a report to be worked.

 

Yes, and it will drop back into the report queue which will take longer for someone to get to.

 

Which is the proper method to handle it. Inquiries are for general questions, reports are for past possible incidents the pilot had already contacted the company about.

 

Someone correct me if I'm mistaken, but my understand is that ALPA gets to reports based on event date, not on submission date.