MOU 25-05
#1111
Sure and they can give us:
1. PS commuting
2. Commuting language to protect the drivers and train riders
3. Improved Health Care (ours sucks)
4. First Class DH with only option to roll back to C+ (regardless of time of booking)
5. No middle seat DH
6. Lower priced FCFL
7. Ability to select pilot meals
8. Make fatigue "calls" automated
9. Paid Parking (for all pilots)
10. Uniform Allowance to include dry cleaning
11. Make hats optional
12. Provide us an option to wear a coat in winter that actually works
13. Pilots get +4 S2 passes over non-cons
14. Automate CS processes for coverage
15. Vacation time = ADG
16. All training pay = ADG
17. Guard rails on GFB (needs teeth)
18. Permanently eliminate sick look back
19. More vacation weeks available in the May-Aug timeframes
20. If it's on the no APD use days = holiday pay
and on and on and on. And finally, it's their issue to solve, not ours. And if we are going to "help" them solve it, then we need to extract as much benefit for the pilot group as possible. We'll see how bad they want it.
1. PS commuting
2. Commuting language to protect the drivers and train riders
3. Improved Health Care (ours sucks)
4. First Class DH with only option to roll back to C+ (regardless of time of booking)
5. No middle seat DH
6. Lower priced FCFL
7. Ability to select pilot meals
8. Make fatigue "calls" automated
9. Paid Parking (for all pilots)
10. Uniform Allowance to include dry cleaning
11. Make hats optional
12. Provide us an option to wear a coat in winter that actually works
13. Pilots get +4 S2 passes over non-cons
14. Automate CS processes for coverage
15. Vacation time = ADG
16. All training pay = ADG
17. Guard rails on GFB (needs teeth)
18. Permanently eliminate sick look back
19. More vacation weeks available in the May-Aug timeframes
20. If it's on the no APD use days = holiday pay
and on and on and on. And finally, it's their issue to solve, not ours. And if we are going to "help" them solve it, then we need to extract as much benefit for the pilot group as possible. We'll see how bad they want it.
#1114
It is their problem to solve, if it's a problem. I don't think the nebulous "costs" (whatever the number) are a problem. The 23M7 coverage shortcut has become the norm and they are willing to make the payments to skipped "affected" pilots now and in the future. The MOU does nothing more but hand them a more efficient way to cover any and all trips in 12 minutes. They got what they wanted and we got a pinky swear to honor seniority at some point in the future. It cost them NOTHING. It cost us access to premium time unless you are willing to accept harassing calls at all hours of the day and night. So yeah, I guess you're right... no change, no cost increase if/when they make the change, and no problem.
#1115
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2023
Posts: 3,417
Likes: 863
Also curious where you got the EOY numbers from? The latest ATCR (available on US DOT website) only covers up thru Sept 2025.
Finally, people posting here are offering "solutions" to a "problem". So if there is no "problem" why are so many offering "solutions".
#1116
Banned
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 8,831
Likes: 499
Cancellations were not however. Big difference between "completion" and "cancellation" and what matters more to the customer.
Also curious where you got the EOY numbers from? The latest ATCR (available on US DOT website) only covers up thru Sept 2025.
Finally, people posting here are offering "solutions" to a "problem". So if there is no "problem" why are so many offering "solutions".
Also curious where you got the EOY numbers from? The latest ATCR (available on US DOT website) only covers up thru Sept 2025.
Finally, people posting here are offering "solutions" to a "problem". So if there is no "problem" why are so many offering "solutions".
our cancelation rate is among the lowest in the industry this year as well.
my point is that trip coverage and respecting seniority is our problem. the company doesn’t care who gets paid extra. we do. so when we talk about all of our leverage, what are we actually holding that the company desires?
#1117
Banned
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 8,831
Likes: 499
It is their problem to solve, if it's a problem. I don't think the nebulous "costs" (whatever the number) are a problem. The 23M7 coverage shortcut has become the norm and they are willing to make the payments to skipped "affected" pilots now and in the future. The MOU does nothing more but hand them a more efficient way to cover any and all trips in 12 minutes. They got what they wanted and we got a pinky swear to honor seniority at some point in the future. It cost them NOTHING. It cost us access to premium time unless you are willing to accept harassing calls at all hours of the day and night. So yeah, I guess you're right... no change, no cost increase if/when they make the change, and no problem.
so again, what should we have gotten instead, and what leverage do we actually have to extract it?
#1118
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 5,577
Likes: 317
i’m from the future…or i’m obviously using incomplete numbers since the year isn’t over
our cancelation rate is among the lowest in the industry this year as well.
my point is that trip coverage and respecting seniority is our problem. the company doesn’t care who gets paid extra. we do. so when we talk about all of our leverage, what are we actually holding that the company desires?
our cancelation rate is among the lowest in the industry this year as well.
my point is that trip coverage and respecting seniority is our problem. the company doesn’t care who gets paid extra. we do. so when we talk about all of our leverage, what are we actually holding that the company desires?
#1119
#1120
You can't say you are wronged when the company is compliant and they moved your cheese. I agree it was never meant to be this way but we agreed... that's on us. 23M7 was pandora's box and we gave the company the key.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post




