|
Originally Posted by Khantahr
(Post 3979461)
Let's assume that quick slips happen. They will effectively replace IAs and restore seniority to trip coverage.
What about one of these ideas for mitigating the farmers:
Obviously we'd be selling not giving. What's our price? Perhaps they must offer X VAS periods when an IROP is proclaimed. Maybe make silver slips available to reserves (with the PB days). Maybe bring back batch sizes. How badly does management want to stop paying M7? just spitballin' no real deep thought feel free to shoot holes in this idea |
Originally Posted by Wolf424
(Post 3979459)
Respectfully disagree. He didn’t “promise” anything, but swung for the fences pre-Covid as the company was making money hand over fist.
LOAs 20-03 and 20-04 were agreed to during his time as MEC chair. 20-04 established the batch sizes that were [later] given away, the permanent reduced TLV, and the permanent reduction of the GS trigger. I’ll also never forget during one of the Covid town halls where EB said that RS’ MEC was the most “disagreeable and stubborn MEC he’d ever worked with” (something to that effect). That turned out pretty well for us when the Company was clamoring for concessions. I’d hardly call that “not effective” |
Originally Posted by notEnuf
(Post 3979531)
They can't cover it any other way. They are never happy about paying more than 1x but they absolutely have in the past tried to reinterpret things going into sect. 6. Call the dysfunction a side benefit of their predicament but they will try to challenge any and every line in the PWA. If it has the potential to divide the group they are absolutely OK with it given the sunken costs. Less cause and effect but rather acceptable expense given the situation and the goal.
Even if it was all automated, granting 12 min for 60 OOBWS with auto-accept on takes 12 hours. No one can run an operation that way. |
Originally Posted by SideStickMonkey
(Post 3979547)
They can't because OOBWS with auto-accept gums up the entire process.
Even if it was all automated, granting 12 min for 60 OOBWS with auto-accept on takes 12 hours. No one can run an operation that way. |
Originally Posted by notEnuf
(Post 3979552)
So what we have now is the solution, 23M7. They don't even try and they don't choose to use any mitigation. They chose to expand the use of 23M7 and we gave them 8 hours. (it should have been half that) It is what it is. We will see if they choose to implement QS. I don't think there is much upside for the company to do it because the cost is the same and the panic serves their purpose. Auto-accept was a negotiated provision and QS negates it if/when it s a thing, solving your problem.
23M7 needs to go away. Renegotiate batch sizes and get rid of auto-accept. Oh, and OOBWS disappears from the 23.O ladder |
Originally Posted by SideStickMonkey
(Post 3979558)
Why even try to mitigate something for a single step that takes 12 hours? The "solution" with QS at least brings back seniority which we have none of at the moment except for the few senior people in each category getting all the extra 23M7 pay.
23M7 needs to go away. Renegotiate batch sizes and get rid of auto-accept. |
Originally Posted by GutterGuard
(Post 3979539)
We could throw our whole PWA out the window tomorrow too. After all, why not?
|
Originally Posted by notEnuf
(Post 3979560)
If that is the will of the group fine. The price will be too high for the company. I'm not willing to spend capital on it again but I'm only 1 vote. As for auto accept, find an alternative that only calls me when the trip is mine and my phone doesn't blow up with nuisance calls for trips that will be covered by pilots pages senior to me.
Again, GS auto-accept is not causing the problem. I'd be willing to bet a GS doesn't even make it out of the first 10 with auto-accept on currently. Someone in that group takes that GS. That isn't holding up coverage. But if we can't even make it to the GS step, it doesn't matter. So, reasonable batch sizes + removing 23M7 to get rid of auto-accept... We have two working coverage ladders again. |
Originally Posted by Xray678
(Post 3979497)
a quick answer to a lot of these problems, move OOBWS below GS in the coverage ladder. They could do that tomorrow.
Although eliminating OOBWS is ideal, this would be a simple MOU ... and I would bet a shiny nickel it would pass the Memory Rat by a yuge margin. A5S |
Originally Posted by All 5 Stages
(Post 3979620)
This ^^^
Although eliminating OOBWS is ideal, this would be a simple MOU ... and I would bet a shiny nickel it would pass the Memory Rat by a yuge margin. A5S |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:46 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands