Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)

- - MOU 25-05 (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/151540-mou-25-05-a.html)

So until they finish the QS programming, are we still doing the IA free for all? They say the agreement starts right away, but also that it doesn't until the programming is done. I don't understand what that really means in the interim.

I think this is a pretty solid deal. shout out to ALPA for getting it done..just wish it could be implemented today!

I'd just appreciate not being ARCOS's at 3am when I have zero chance of actually being awarded the GS.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prospect (Post 3965746)

Yes. QS doesn’t become a required step of the trip coverage ladder until after programming is complete.

In the meantime, the company will negate their only “incentive” for getting programming done by GFBing every other sick call.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ancman (Post 3965752)

Yes. QS doesn’t become a required step of the trip coverage ladder until after programming is complete.

In the meantime, the company will negate their only “incentive” for getting programming done by GFBing every other sick call.

That will get expensive for them to verify all those, especially as verification got much easier via QHCP/telehealth.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 20Fathoms (Post 3965739)

I’m cautiously optimistic about this agreement and probably would have voted yes if it had gone to Memory Rat as it should have but I do have some concerns.

I fear that this will create a giant red “easy” button for CS even more so than IAs. With IAs they still have to field a multitude of incoming calls which adds to their workload, but QS are fire and forget. I think they will be used far more than we think.

Yes we have the deterrent that it pays 300 percent, but I wonder how much the individual scheduler really cares about that. QS replacing IAs is great, but if it becomes so easy and common that they start replacing what would have gone out as GS then that’s a huge negative for me as GS has auto accept and QS does not. I also don’t think this will do anything to rein in 23M7 farming.

TLDR: if QS are used as a one for one replacement for IAs then this is a really good agreement, but if they start to reduce GS as well then that’s a step backward for me personally as my category almost never gets IAs. Perhaps we can add some guardrails in Section 6.

The sick agreement seems like a home run.

Individual schedulers probably don’t care much, but the managers who have pressure regarding costs and have to answer for their departments effect on the bottom line do. They may eventually give marching orders to the grunts in CS that they have to start trying to do things cheaper (follow the coverage ladder).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gone Flying (Post 3965672)

VAS goes after GS in the coverage ladder and thus would not help with this. standby rotations cost 21 hours for 2 days of SC.

both seem useful during forecasted IROPS but not for your run of the mill last minute sick call/ broken rotation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by crewdawg (Post 3965683)

True, forgot VAS went below GS. Well, when every day is an IROP, it seems like they'd be a good option lol.

Go read 23 EE 6. That's only if Tracking builds the flying in to an open time rotation. If they were smart, which they aren't, they would never build the flying in to a rotation and assign it straight to the VAS pilot. That's allowed by 23EE6a.
I'm pretty sure this is why the company stopped using them, because they ended up having to pay out so many VAS pilots assignment pay last summer after the fact because they gave them flying that was in OT and didn't get to the VAS step of 23N/O before assigning it to the VAS. If it touches OT, 23L5 says it has to stay in OT and run the 23N/O gamut. It can't be removed and labeled as uncovered not in OT that 23EE6a allows.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ancman (Post 3965752)

I understand they can't do QS yet, but do they get to keep doing IAs the way they have been until the QS programming is ready? I think this should have been addressed in the FAQ but I don't see it.

Newbie here... Assuming MEMRAT = member ratification? I.e. a vote?

Quote:

Originally Posted by SunnyAndMinus5 (Post 3965784)

Newbie here... Assuming MEMRAT = member ratification? I.e. a vote?

that’s correct. we gotta military this place up with these abbreviations