It’s definitely something we can agree to disagree on, but your statement that it does not have an effect on QOL is still 100 percent false. Maybe not your QOL but we’re a big group. I don’t commute but I don’t get excited thinking about what we could trade our commuter clause for.

In a more general sense, I don’t think we should be looking for things to give away. Whatever happened to no concessions? There’s a reason the company wants CNO.

In fact now that I think about it, the effects aren’t limited to just reserves. Ever GS? Both of the trips that were removed for me this year went out as GS. Maybe it helped your QOL and you didn’t even know it.

 

This actually makes alot of sense to me…assuming it IS leveraged for our benefit. Seems to me that is how negotiations (should) work (*ahem* batch sizes). While I will insist on holding the company accountable to the letter of the PWA wrt notification, objectively it does not matter how I get notified if done legally. The question is what do we get for this ask?

 

I understand your points. But the only reason it improved your QOL (or the GS pilot’s QOL) is because it was a compensation for violating the contract.

Are we supposed to get benefits from the contract based on what it actually provides, or based on what we can get for violations, or both?

I can see the argument for both, but if I had to pick one, I’d easily say the former. The point of the contract is to derive value from its contents. I’d be willing to bet that even if the company paid all the compensatory 23M7s correctly, we would still have a large group up in arms about how the company is violating 23N/O.

Its honestly a more philosophical question about the nature of a labor contract, and as I said earlier, these weren’t all my ideas.

 

SK was involved only in the fact that when asked if unlimited batch sizes would fix the 23m7 usage, he said it should. The MEC chair along with C44 was looking for an excuse to eliminate batch sizes and, frankly, to get rid of SK because he wasn't just blindly nodding along with whatever crazy idea they put out.

To your second point, banking your QOL solely on a remedy for contract violations is short sighter and, frankly, ridiculous. It isn't even remotely relatable to "trading away the commuter clause." Yes, maybe you and a few others get trips dropped or 23m7 pay for the company violating the contract. The fact is, the company gets away with FAR more than they compensate. In the end, I'd much rather they just follow the contract. Let's say, in the fall, they realize they need to train their schedulers better and they don't improperly notify anymore going forward. Is that a concession to you?

I can't believe we have to have the same conversation we had in 19-23 that just because the company isn't losing doesn't mean it's a concession. Yes, the batch size giveaway orchestrated by DA and DH was a huge white flag. But that doesn't mean that trading a human leaving a voicemail for a robot leaving a voicemail for something valuable to the pilot group is a concession.

 

I don’t see any way that would actually be feasible. They would need to send an already-covered rotation out for trip coverage, even after the same rotation has already been covered under 23.M.7.

It would:

1. Be simple for any pilot to see that the rotation has already been covered, then raise their hand with no intent to fly.

and

2. Defeat the purpose of scheduling using 23.M.7 in the first place, if there are pilots available and willing to fly the rotation who can be awarded it in a timely fashion through proper coverage.

 

Well he was right...up until the company saw that they could use it again to extract even more from us. ...and there are people all over FB falling for it hook, line and sinker.

 

They’re a vocal minority, many of whom made the same statements about batch sizes. Most don’t understand the true value of those elements of our PWA, on a cost basis.

It becomes a bad combination when they start writing letters and making phone calls to some of the weaker MEC members who don’t know how to value / leverage those items either. I’ve made it clear to my reps that any potential agreement must come with a substantial quid, and must go to MEMRAT.

Preferably, save it as section 6 leverage. Increase the value of that leverage by lighting a fire under automated enforcement development - thereby reducing unpaid violations and 23.M.7 incidents.

 

Fair points.

Nope that would be a unilateral action by the company that it is well within its rights to take. Would it affect my QOL? Absolutely. But so would closing the SEA pilot base or giving all our Hawaii flying to SLC. Both of those would be above-board actions the company could unilaterally take that would still degrade my QOL.

The difference is I expect that from the company, I don’t expect it from my own union. You say you want the company to follow the contract but then advocate writing them into compliance when they violate it.

That being said everything has a price. Bringing back voluntary verification and eliminating GFB would just about do it, so maybe we’re not too far apart after all but right now this whole conversation is giving me batch size Deja vu.

Edit: Also what anc said: MEMRAT is a must.

 

I'll say it, I'm fine with going to CNO, I don't want to talk to humans anyways
Saves the schedulers time to actually work on important things, instead of having to call hundreds of pilots and wait for a voicemail, just to tell them they have 30hrs of rest.
I'm sure we could get something good for it.

No I don't, and never will work for ALPA, so don't worry

 

The philosophical question only applies if both parties are honorable in the execution. We have seen how willing the company is to violate the PWA. Punitive payouts for the violations is the only pragmatic approach. I agree that in a perfect world the compensation should come from the PWA being followed, unfortunately that requires mutual respect and genuine good faith. As for CNO there is a huge cost saving benefit for the company and I doubt we know a true number that would reflect an appropriate quid. Auto accept is necessary until there is a solution for the phone blowing up every 5 minutes for no reason.