|
|
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 1599040)
NO NO NO . That is Dickson's memo. It is not what we have. You are one of our best informed pilots Gloopy, yet you just referred to Dickson's unilateral edict as if it were our contract. That saddens me. I blame ALPA for that. We aren't even putting up a fight. They better have a damn good reason for not putting up a fight. Donatelli writes a good letter but the facts speak for themselves. Here we are in March and he so far seems to be unwilling to defend the contract. He won't even file a grievance. Guys now think and act like Dickson's memo is our contract. Management has won by default. ALPA has forfeited. That is totally unacceptable.
Here's the guidance from the DTW reps: Lacking a negotiated agreement stating otherwise, ALPA believes that the PWA language should be enforced and will “vigorously represent” a pilot who is removed from an assignment and is subsequently penalized by having a PD (Personal Drop = loss of a day’s pay) placed on their schedule, and being required to have a “talk” with a Chief Pilot, Here's the guidance from the MSP reps: Although ALPA has been engaged in negotiations for over 2 months with Flight Ops to achieve mutually acceptable changes to our PWA to reconcile the differences between the current PWA language and the new restrictions under FAR 117, an agreement has not been reached. Flight Ops has instituted a policy that instructs pilots to self-notify for assignments that ensures compliance with FAR 117, but this policy also infringes upon the terms of our PWA. In those situations where pilots are ineligible to accept an assignment for failing to comply with Flight Ops policy, a Personal Drop (PD) is being placed on the pilot’s line, which can have a negative effect on the pilot’s pay. If there is a CPR (Chief Pilot Review) placed on your line, you will need to speak to a chief pilot before any additional flying will be assigned to you. Because the policy unilaterally changes PWA language that is clear and unambiguous, we are committed to protecting pilots who are penalized for complying with our PWA. If you are given a PD in response to an assignment notification that is in compliance with our PWA, please notify us immediately. While we are working to reach an agreement, please remember policy cannot supersede the PWA. Read that last sentence from the MSP reps carefully. As I understand it, many pilots on reserve are acknowledging assignments earlier than required by the PWA because it benefits them (hotels, commuting timing, etc). I also understand no pilots have lost pay from a failure to comply with the policy. |
Originally Posted by RonRicco
(Post 1599168)
I have to say, this has become a very interesting debate over a topic I really never thought I would hear pilots complaining about. (I should have known better)
So, to break it down. Pilot A gets a good deal because he has decided to stay senior in category. Pilot B, although at some point, or even possibly now could bid a category to give him the same option, would rather take away the pilot A's (and every pilots) potential option and redistribute that among the other pilots. Where do we stop with this line of thinking? Those senior 777 guys who get weekends, holidays, and get to fly to places other than MLU? Do we start breaking up that club as well and giving that time off to the rest of the pilot group? This almost sounds like that debate where a pilot wanted to increase the reserves required on the weekends where pilots wouldn't be able to drop trips and less green slips would go out (therefore giving a reserve less chance of flying on the weekend). Really? For what it is worth, I am neither neither senior in category or an FO, but I would be against taking away the current recovery rules for them. How do other majors do it? If they had a clue how many OEs/TOEs and when, could they build and set aside LCA trips, then only have to buy a limited number of trips beyond the planned ones? Not trying to ruin someone's good deal, just looking for some middle ground. |
Originally Posted by Dirtdiver
(Post 1599185)
I think what makes the OE removal/recovery deal a hot topic is that the two solutions we've had are so extreme. Paid to stay home is so sweet, assigned the worst trip in the bid package as recovery so awful.
How do other majors do it? If they had a clue how many OEs/TOEs and when, could they build and set aside LCA trips, then only have to buy a limited number of trips beyond the planned ones? Not trying to ruin someone's good deal, just looking for some middle ground. |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1599125)
Where is this wheel pay rumor coming from? I talked to a rep and he has heard nothing. The FAR's state flight time is logged from the first movement of the aircraft with intent for flight. It starts at pushback. The contract says the exact same thing as far as how we get paid. Is this another version of forum hysteria that seems so common?
Flight time means: (1) Pilot time that commences when an aircraft moves under its own power for the purpose of flight and ends when the aircraft comes to rest after landing; or (2) For a glider without self-launch capability, pilot time that commences when the glider is towed for the purpose of flight and ends when the glider comes to rest after landing. Yes, I know of at least one airline that used forward movement on the 777 as the trigger mechanism for pay purposes. What I don't know is if they still do after their union filed a grievance against the company. It is not paranoia if they are actually out to get you ;) |
Originally Posted by flyallnite
(Post 1599188)
Yes, let's roll back a good deal for most FO's. Why? Because that's what we do. Find ways to make this job harder. Maybe we could offer a pay cut too. For just the FO's. Because that's what you are saying. Just stop.
|
Originally Posted by Dirtdiver
(Post 1599185)
How do other majors do it?.
|
Originally Posted by boog123
(Post 1599162)
How do other airlines do augmented trans con rotations. Just curious how that would work from like NYC to LAX and back in one day, if it's possible
Class 3 rest facility means a seat in an aircraft cabin or flight deck that reclines at least 40 degrees and provides leg and foot support. |
Originally Posted by Ragtop Day
(Post 1593871)
Just over $5000 per diem, $9000 ProDiem calculated.
|
Originally Posted by RonRicco
(Post 1599168)
I have to say, this has become a very interesting debate over a topic I really never thought I would hear pilots complaining about. (I should have known better)
So, to break it down. Pilot A gets a good deal because he has decided to stay senior in category. Pilot B, although at some point, or even possibly now could bid a category to give him the same option, would rather take away the pilot A's (and every pilots) potential option and redistribute that among the other pilots. Where do we stop with this line of thinking? Those senior 777 guys who get weekends, holidays, and get to fly to places other than MLU? Do we start breaking up that club as well and giving that time off to the rest of the pilot group? This almost sounds like that debate where a pilot wanted to increase the reserves required on the weekends where pilots wouldn't be able to drop trips and less green slips would go out (therefore giving a reserve less chance of flying on the weekend). Really? For what it is worth, I am neither neither senior in category or an FO, but I would be against taking away the current recovery rules for them. |
Originally Posted by Purple Drank
(Post 1598953)
It warms my heart to hear captains who feel that way.
Unfortunately, guys like tsquare will gladly give up recovery, scope, and pretty much anything else affecting F/Os (and themselves--but they can't be convinced of that) if it means they can get a couple more bucks an hour. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:53 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands