Not sure what you are insinuating.

I talked to SK about notifications last week. He absolutely is on the pilots side for this.

 

If you ask him, he may be able to tell you his thoughts about leverage. Of course, he is on the pilots side. I agree. We’ve discussed this issue at length in person.

Does any pilot really care *personally* if a human calls them, or a robot? No. The company would love it to be a robot, what are they willing to give up for that?

If the counter argument is that we could get paid more from them violating it and then getting a remedy payment, then that’s not the point of a union or a contract. The intent is to get a contract that is favorable to us, not one that can be violated so we can be compensated for the violation. (This can also be applied to batch size arguments).

The company would likely love for everythin to be automated. For example, YS through ARCOS or something (or everything through ARCOS). They would love VRU for everything. That will COST them if they want it, if our negotiators do their job.The pilots, should not GAS the source of notification, it doesn’t affect QOL at all. I know I don’t. Therefore it shouldn’t be seen as a concession since there’s no meaningful effect on the pilots.

If you don’t believe this is viable or good, then give SK a call. These are not my ideas.

 

We already have pilots on Facebook advocating for just this... unbelievable how many pilots were commenting in support of getting rid of auto accept and getting rid of proffers all together.

 

What do you mean? If you have access via an API then you have access to the data. Do we or don't we have access? I'd assume they could easily give us GET permissions and not care what we do with the data as long as we don't make it public. Wasn't that the whole idea of giving ALPA API access? They don't have to allow any kind of Post or Delete access. Nothing about this is an IT security nightmare if properly designed.

 

You're assuming DBMS is properly designed though.

 

One of the excuses the previous MEC chairman used to get rid of Ace was because they couldn't pass ITs test to gain access, at least as I was told by a rep when I raised the red flag on terminating that contract. I don't know enough about IT to have a real opinion here, just what I'm told.

Sometimes, maybe not? They often abandon it well before the GS call goes out. Point is, it doesn't matter if you have an auto accept in to get paid for 23m7

 

why only look for people with auto accept? The fact that scheduling skipped over to IA doesn’t change the fact that if they ran it as they should, every pilot with a GS request will get notified, in seniority order, before it should go to IA. Auto accept doesn’t change that.

 

this is why we need a “ghost” green slip system. accept what you’d actually be willing to fly, get 23m7’d if you’re the most senior who would. the harvesting of 23m7 with no intent to fly anything is ridiculous

 

This is just straight up false. Twice this year and an average of 2-3 times per year I have rotations dropped due to improper notification. To say flying a crappy 4 day vs staying at home for the same pay doesn’t have an effect on QOL is absurd.

Maybe we can trade it for a double pinky promise to document 23M7 instead of the regular pinky promise we got for batch sizes . I’ve heard good things about SK, but let’s not forget he was involved in the batch size giveaway. If he gives away CNO, he’ll have shown his true colors.

 

So you are in the camp that removing easily violatable sections of the contract is a concession because you lose out on the remedy?

The contract is not made or intended to be a remedy paying machine. That is a secondary and unintended effect.

Sorry, I just don’t think so. If a robot calls you instead of a human, and that was made possible because positive space commuting was provided in exchange, or some other big win, then I think that’s good. Yeah I guess you’ll lose out on being compensated because now management is actually following the contract. If you see that as a concession then I agree to disagree.

edit: make no mistake. I like seeing 23M7 show up on my schedule and time card. But I’d rather the company didn’t wipe their *** with the coverage ladder constantly.