Search

Notices

MOU 25-05

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-03-2025 | 06:41 AM
  #341  
FangsF15's Avatar
Moderator
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 8,099
Likes: 1,047
Default

Originally Posted by ancman
I agree with most of what you wrote. But my point was that we spend a lot of time discussing / negotiating lookback and verification triggers when GFB renders most of it moot.

GFB has been used extensively across the entire pilot group in years past.
There have been times where that has been true. And they have also reportedly scaled way back on GFB because they weren't catching (m)any fish, and it was costing them too much money and verification-excluded hours. The juice wasn't worth the squeeze.

Maybe they will reevaluate that equation during this period where no verification hours accumulate. Maybe even more so as we near the end of the sick year, and there is virtually no disincentive on a borderline call to not call in sick. But again, it's not that hard to get a legitimate note.
Reply
Old 11-03-2025 | 06:44 AM
  #342  
Line Holder
10 Years
 
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 1,979
Likes: 107
Default

Originally Posted by notEnuf
I'm over it…..
Reply
Old 11-03-2025 | 06:44 AM
  #343  
notEnuf's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 13,183
Likes: 638
From: ir.delta.com
Default

Originally Posted by Gunfighter
I hope the company takes advantage of this easier coverage tool and skips the GS step more often. When CS skips GS by hitting the QS easy button more than they already do with IA it expands the 23M7 financial burden going into negotiations. We have given the entry level CSers an easy button that generates millions of additional pilot value out of the PWA. Every additional QS usage over IA because of the convenience of automation gives us more leverage. If this indeed becomes more widespread than IA it's a huge win for pilots.
You are assuming they get the 23M7 piece of this right. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt but that means more fishing for seniors and that will drive them right back to skipping and QS. So sure, but now first up on the next ladder step will get the payment. This guarantees no 23M7 gravy for anyone other than the top 3.
Reply
Old 11-03-2025 | 06:47 AM
  #344  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 12,363
Likes: 904
Default

Originally Posted by notEnuf
I'm over it but it would have been nice to have this debate and give input before the MOU... representative governance and all.
Well I mean, what happened is the literal definition of representative governance.
Reply
Old 11-03-2025 | 06:56 AM
  #345  
notEnuf's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 13,183
Likes: 638
From: ir.delta.com
Default

Originally Posted by Meme In Command
Set qualifiers and don't just submit a blanket GS.

If you're telling the system "I'm willing to fly literally anything" what do you expect is going to happen?
I expect auto accept to filter them to the ones I can actually accept. We negotiated for that and for the batch limits but now we don't have either.
Reply
Old 11-03-2025 | 07:01 AM
  #346  
Meme In Command's Avatar
Leaves Biscoff crumbs
Veteran: Army
Loved
On Reserve
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 3,265
Likes: 941
From: Blue Juice Taste Tester
Default

Originally Posted by FangsF15
Some folks weren't here for past contracts, and may not understand the special place Pilot Sick has in the heart of the company. They HATE it. With a passion. (At least in part, because we have pilots who abuse it. To what degree is beyond the point). IMO, the company over-reacts to that 'abuse', but the point is the company has an absolute burr up their backside over sick.

It was one of their major gatekeeper issues in C15. At the time, we had voluntary verification of sick (but foolishly gave that back in C19 because somehow self-reporting/documenting was too onerous on their admin folks). C15 required a MD note after 160 hours, but also had a provision where the company could always mandate an MD note. We are the only major carrier (I am aware of) who has GFB in their contract, much less an over-30-day medical records disclosure clause. C15 also tightened up the language on mandating a "bonafide relationship", where your spouse/parent/cousin could no longer write your sick note. It also had exclusion from lookback for 'major bone' or a hospital stay, but not a knee replacement. It was silly. I mean, what valid reason can one give to say that a PA or NP couldn't verify your sickness in some instances? How cynical do you have to be to say, "No, you MUST go to an MD!? C19 did slightly expand the threshold for 'lookback' from 100 hours to 120 hours. All that said, we do have a much larger annual allocation than other companies. We have all these little nuance rules and exclusions, all because the company hates sick and wants to create disincentives to using it.

My point is that for the company to transition from disputing whether MiCrew 'worked' for sick reporting, to now agreeing to waive sick verification is a BIG deal. That's like Seinfeld's Soup Nazi suddenly not caring how you ordered the soup. Or, like the pilot group suddenly saying "we'll waive PB days for the next couple of months". That in and of itself tells me we had some serious leverage/proof hanging over them, and giving that up should not be dismissed as a small thing - not because of how it's good for us, but for how important it was to the company.
Take notes, Sextagenarians

THIS is how you mentor your broccoli haired juniors
Reply
Old 11-03-2025 | 07:03 AM
  #347  
notEnuf's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 13,183
Likes: 638
From: ir.delta.com
Default

Originally Posted by OOfff
and when they don’t stop awarding green slips, will you also reserve the right to say you were wrong?
Fair. Bookmark this post, I hope you are right but my opinion is you will be wrong.
Reply
Old 11-03-2025 | 07:05 AM
  #348  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 5,545
Likes: 285
Default

Sick leave has been a battle since I’ve been here. When I was hired, we didn’t have verification lookback. You went to 75 percent sick leave pay. Then we got the 100 hours of unverified per sick leave year and you could verify whatever you wanted to. Then we voted down something horrible and settled on the 100 hours unverified in previous 12 months with no option to verify. Turned into 120 hours last contract. My point is it is always a battle.
Reply
Old 11-03-2025 | 07:10 AM
  #349  
notEnuf's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 13,183
Likes: 638
From: ir.delta.com
Default

Originally Posted by FangsF15
Some folks weren't here for past contracts, and may not understand the special place Pilot Sick has in the heart of the company. They HATE it. With a passion. (At least in part, because we have pilots who abuse it. To what degree is beyond the point). IMO, the company over-reacts to that 'abuse', but the point is the company has an absolute burr up their backside over sick.

It was one of their major gatekeeper issues in C15. At the time, we had voluntary verification of sick (but foolishly gave that back in C19 because somehow self-reporting/documenting was too onerous on their admin folks). C15 required a MD note after 160 hours, but also had a provision where the company could always mandate an MD note. We are the only major carrier (I am aware of) who has GFB in their contract, much less an over-30-day medical records disclosure clause. C15 also tightened up the language on mandating a "bonafide relationship", where your spouse/parent/cousin could no longer write your sick note. It also had exclusion from lookback for 'major bone' or a hospital stay, but not a knee replacement. It was silly. I mean, what valid reason can one give to say that a PA or NP couldn't verify your sickness in some instances? How cynical do you have to be to say, "No, you MUST go to an MD!? C19 did slightly expand the threshold for 'lookback' from 100 hours to 120 hours. All that said, we do have a much larger annual allocation than other companies. We have all these little nuance rules and exclusions, all because the company hates sick and wants to create disincentives to using it.

My point is that for the company to transition from disputing whether MiCrew 'worked' for sick reporting, to now agreeing to waive sick verification is a BIG deal. That's like Seinfeld's Soup Nazi suddenly not caring how you ordered the soup. Or, like the pilot group suddenly saying "we'll waive PB days for the next couple of months". That in and of itself tells me we had some serious leverage/proof hanging over them, and giving that up should not be dismissed as a small thing - not because of how it's good for us, but for how important it was to the company.
If you truly believe this then we should have gotten a much better deal.
Reply
Old 11-03-2025 | 07:11 AM
  #350  
crewdawg's Avatar
Moderator
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,342
Likes: 347
Default

Honest question, is the note thing really that big of a deal? The one I've had to provide in over a decade was easy enough and only becuase of a GFB call. If that rate keeps up, having to provide 2 or 3 notes in a 3.5 decade career is a small pain to keep an amazing sick benefit. I wasn't a fan of it initially, but I really don't understand the gnashing of teeth over this. The fact that there was a question about switching to an accumulation model is concerning.
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