23.M.7 Updated
 

MEC posted a grievance settlement for abuse of 27.M.7. Emails sent out this morning.

Questions to those more savvy; is this aimed at the pilots abusing 23.M.7 to cherry pick greenies or more at the schedulers skipping the proper GS protocol?

I like the part about posting reports for all to see. Seems like good accountability and transparency if it works.

Thoughts from the group?

-Bo

That would be the quid part. The controversy will be over batch sizes. By page 4 of this thread we should be deep into an age discrimination debate.

nothing to see here

It’ll be good to force the company to pay the affected pilot, rather than waste our own time and resources to try to detect and correct failures to do so. It’s going to get even more expensive for the operation to survive on premium pay and will hopefully provide pressure to fly a schedule we’re actually manned for.

Unlimited batch sizes won’t do much once everyone figures out you can just click to auto-accept but not auto-ack a GS, though. We’ll be right back to 10 minute steps through all the pilots who said they’d accept the trip but ultimately don’t respond or complete the acknowledgement. Six pilots an hour ain’t gonna cut it and there will be tons of 23M7 use for the foreseeable future. That’s my guess, anyway…

The company already agreed to pay the affected pilots when they signed the PWA. We've seen how that works in practice. Now they agree to pay the affected pilots, and run a coverage report showing they did. Pinky promise no take backs!
And part of the remedy is to totally do away with batch sizes? So the company's punishment is actually a gift to them? This has C44 authorship written all over it.

*did not read the email

If the company got away with not paying half of the affected pilots, and this closes that gap…the pilot group doubles our “penalty” pay. You and I agree that what is happening in practice is unacceptable. It’s bad for the pilot group and bad for our operation. But I’ve also heard the estimated underpayment is far worse than 50% and other than our and our union’s own due diligence, we currently have no good mechanism to find and correct all of the 23M7 deviations.

I don’t think there is a punishment here, so that’s a failure. But the path forward is better than status quo, and that’s coming from a guy who supported batch limits.

Delta loves their data…it’ll be interesting to look at the data of 23M7 payments before and after this new obligation.

I think that if they’re publishing the affected pilots’ names, they’re probably going to pay those pilots.

The issue with doing the auto-accept method is that in batches with multiple rotations you will not get called and will not be able to rank preferences. ARCOS will simply do that for you based on whatever parameter you have set on your slip request and you will only get offered the single trip it awards you. And that is a pretty blunt tool, so I think that most pilots are still going to want to see the available trips and sort them themselves during the proffer window.

My point was that they might not "publish" all the trips they used 23m7 on like they agreed to. Time will tell.