Search

Notices

MOU 25-05

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-04-2025 | 06:45 AM
  #1271  
Line Holder
 
Joined: May 2022
Posts: 460
Likes: 89
Default

Originally Posted by Meme In Command
Sick question:

So I was below 50 hrs of sick used before the memo passed.
So if I call sick now, my look back next year will show below 50hrs regardless?
If you are asking about the 14F4 exception and 14F6a 50 hour usage limits, those are based on actual usage and not "lookback" usage. If you just want to know what your sick lookback will be, it will be whatever you had before July that is within 12 completed bid periods and whatever you have after lookback is turned back on, if it is.
Reply
Old 12-04-2025 | 06:58 AM
  #1272  
flyskisail's Avatar
On Reserve
 
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 71
Likes: 8
Default

I really hope we can figure out a way to end all the QHCP, gfb, look back blah blah nonsense. It’s all anyone is talking about. And it really does nothing in the end. It may have worked in the 80s, when you had to call a doc, drive there, have him fill form, fax it in, etc. now it’s a nothing burger with teledoc. My tummy hurt, ok here’s a note, give me 30 bucks. Done in less than 20 mins. Just make it personal time. Let’s be done with it and move on.
Reply
Old 12-04-2025 | 07:51 AM
  #1273  
FangsF15's Avatar
Moderator
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 8,231
Likes: 1,196
Default

Originally Posted by flyskisail
I really hope we can figure out a way to end all the QHCP, gfb, look back blah blah nonsense. It’s all anyone is talking about. And it really does nothing in the end. It may have worked in the 80s, when you had to call a doc, drive there, have him fill form, fax it in, etc. now it’s a nothing burger with teledoc. My tummy hurt, ok here’s a note, give me 30 bucks. Done in less than 20 mins. Just make it personal time. Let’s be done with it and move on.
It's hard to argue with this. Whether the company will realize that the barrier for getting a note these days is incredibly low in another question.

Can't hurt to ask at the table, though.
Reply
Old 12-04-2025 | 07:56 AM
  #1274  
StartngOvr's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 794
Likes: 26
From: Drivin’ the bus
Default

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44
Not really. I want to go back to what we used to have. GS’s covered everything and seniority mattered.
GS goes before OOBWS would solve it….
Reply
Old 12-04-2025 | 08:39 AM
  #1275  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Mar 2022
Posts: 198
Likes: 8
Default

Originally Posted by DeltaboundRedux
Slogging through this thread (I'm not senior enough to join the party via paycheck. Plus: lazy.)

"Show me a company with a 200 page contract, and I'll show you a company that's going to get screwed by someone who actually read all 200 pages" - C Munger.

"The law prohibits many things, but contracts are made to be broken by those clever enough to find the door left ajar." - J. Giradot

"A contract is just a starting point for future litigation." - proverbial.

"If a man signs a contract without reading it, he may find himself bound by clauses he never dreamed existed. The courts will not save him from his own carelessness--NOR SHOULD THEY" - Denning.

------

Personal opinion? (no one cares): At the end of the day, we all have to work together. Senior pilots exploiting loopholes now won't suffer much when they're closed in the next contract/bankruptcy.

But the junior pilots sure will. "Brotherhood" is mostly marketing.

Not especially interested in working with a management team that actively hates pilots. That seems to be the vibe we're working towards though. All so we can protect the top 5% in category or so to exploit loopholes for profit and for "leverage."

TLDR: Long term contracts are for mutual advantage, not short term gain. This is a multiple decade career for most.

Interesting to watch from the sidelines.

Fact is, a constant adversarial relationship might be the best for pilots.
This.
There will always be people strictly out for themselves. While we have to hold the company to the contract, there’s also the fact that they are trying to run a business; of course, most of these “smart” farmers have no idea what that entails. It’s unfortunate that a few ruin things for the many. And now it’s just a free for all because why not join instead of watching every pilot Junior to you take home 23m7 in addition to piggybacking by getting an inverse assignment. I get why people are hoping the crowd, it’s just unfortunate that it’s screwing our own brothers.

Last edited by OpsCheckOK; 12-04-2025 at 09:08 AM.
Reply
Old 12-04-2025 | 08:42 AM
  #1276  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 5,577
Likes: 317
Default

Originally Posted by StartngOvr
GS goes before OOBWS would solve it….
I would eliminate auto accept on OOBWS without even getting anything in return. Lol.
Reply
Old 12-04-2025 | 08:42 AM
  #1277  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Mar 2022
Posts: 198
Likes: 8
Default

Originally Posted by m3113n1a1
If we made OOBWS a step below GS in coverage, a lot of our problems would be solved. I doubt the company would go for this, but possibly. Some pilots wouldn't be happy either.

Personally, I think QS will help when it's implemented. I also think eventually the company will get tired of paying 300% for so many trips and probably staff the airline correctly. But we shall see.
Cap OOBWS to x hrs per month or give WS/OOBWS only 1 or 2 opportunities at auto-accept without acknowledging before it no longer is a proffer. That is probably beyond our IT capabilities, but it’s a temporary solution.
Reply
Old 12-04-2025 | 08:43 AM
  #1278  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Mar 2022
Posts: 198
Likes: 8
Default

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44
I would eliminate auto accept on OOBWS without even getting anything in return. Lol.
100%
still would have the WS auto accept bottleneck, but it would be a start.
Reply
Old 12-04-2025 | 08:52 AM
  #1279  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Jan 2021
Posts: 24
Likes: 18
Default

Originally Posted by OpsCheckOK
BOOM. This. Yep. There will always be people strictly out for themselves. While we have to hold the company to the contract....
stop right there. 23M7 "farming" is pilots holding the company to the contract.

what's delta gonna give us to "solve" their trip coverage dilemma? don't be mad at the smart guys who sniped an aspect of trip coverage to benefit their QOL and paycheck.

and everyone is selfish in this business. you're gonna tell me that you'd turn down free 23m7 if you could get it? to "help" the company run their business? GMAB.
Reply
Old 12-04-2025 | 08:54 AM
  #1280  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Mar 2022
Posts: 198
Likes: 8
Default

Originally Posted by BashiChuni
stop right there. 23M7 "farming" is pilots holding the company to the contract.

what's delta gonna give us to "solve" their trip coverage dilemma? don't be mad at the smart guys who sniped an aspect of trip coverage to benefit their QOL and paycheck.

and everyone is selfish in this business. you're gonna tell me that you'd turn down free 23m7 if you could get it? to "help" the company run their business? GMAB.
Settle down there little fella. I’m not mad at anybody. If you read further, you’d see that I even said that I don’t blame those joining in the free-for-all. There’s a reason for the phrase hate the game and not the player. And for the record, yes, “I can get it,” I just choose not to. You call it what you want, IDGAS.
GMAFB

Last edited by OpsCheckOK; 12-04-2025 at 09:24 AM.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
cactiboss
American
355
09-21-2015 05:20 PM
Doctor
American
250
01-29-2014 12:47 PM
R57 relay
American
86
01-06-2013 09:49 AM
TonyWilliams
Cargo
257
09-09-2010 04:31 PM
fr8rcaptain
Cargo
0
05-12-2009 03:20 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices