Do not take my report as "gospel" but I have been hearing that no one has lost pay. The Company is not pushing to test on that button. Initially the Company thought no negotiations were neessary on FAR 117, has since changed their mind and is now negotiating. It was thought there might be an agreement by the MEC meeting that concluded a week ago. There is a bit of debate about member ratification.

Again, my post is second hand rumor. Call your Rep if you want to know what is happening, or wait for official comm.

In January, at an ALPA new-hire meet & greet, the union reps indicated that there were "…a few" pilots who had abided by the letter of the contract, and were removed from trips for failure to comply with S.D.'s edict/interpretation of 117 and how it fits into our contract. Clearly, there IS a conflict of the new FARs and our contract. And, we all know that 'A Contract Is A Contract'. Until it's not, I guess. So, the question becomes, how many guys are going to have to fall on their sword until we get an agreement on this. If we, as a pilot group, capitulate, and abide by SDs letter, we've lost already. If the union doesn't step it up, and give the line pilots clear, unmistakable guidance, my fear is that we're going to loose this (yet, another!) fight. We are between a rock and a hard place. All we have is the contract. The union must get this acknowledged, and hold the company to it. My fear is that if we fold on this, the DPA is really going to have a lever, and a winnable argument before the pilot group as a whole. An argument that ALPA simply is not capable, or willing, to stand up for this pilot group. I'm hoping for the best outcome here, that we actually get a quid-pro-quo on this negotiation, rather than simply roll over for the company, yet again. Prove me wrong ALPA (that we're going to simply 'roll over). PLEASE, prove me wrong.

I think the bullet point is that pilots very, very, far below your seniority were told to monitor their schedules for reserve trip assignments in ways that did not abide the language in our PWA. Some decided to follow their contract and the Company has also followed the contract, or at least not pursued that matter in a form which would result in a grevance yet.

Our contract conflicts the new FAR 117 rules.
Contract lets Pilots acknowledge trips as late as 3 hrs prior to report.
117 requires 10 hours minimum acknowledgement.
SD says he want all pilots to acknowledge within 2 or 3 hrs.
DALPA says comply with the contract. We got your back.

So the issue is when pilots acknowledge within 10 hours of report. They are complying with the contract but are not in compliance with the new 117 rules. If Pilots acknowledge within 10 hours the company drops the trip and puts a personal drop on the pilots schedule.

Not sure what percentage of Pilots are being paid for these PDs.

It sure would be nice for DALPA to put out some information in this regard to the Pilot group - after all they are telling us to comply with the contract.

Scoop

RR,

I agree with you, but you have to realize that a lot of issues that seem like a "big deal" on this board at times barely rise to the level of a minor concern for the Pilot group as a whole.

The new reserve rules are an example. According to this forum the new reserve system was going to "crush" our pilots who would be routinely flying to ALV+15 including every month.

Well has that happened? I would say mostly no. I bet some guys have flown close to ALV+15 against their will, but a lot more junior commuting Pilots now get a line because many senior pilots are now bidding reserve. It is now possible to see the plug in a category getting a line.

On the other hand, part of the value of this forum is seeing what the other guys are thinking. A lot of these guys are pretty sharp and often come up with stuff I would have never thought of.

Additionally a lot of guys are just brainstorming and post a lot of supposition - I find this also adds to the value of the "All Knowing Thread."

Scoop :)

So following the PWA and not being paid (see below) is in your opinion "nothing to grieve"? ALPA apologists stand up!

I just inquired with a friend who is on reserve and got a call around 1am for LC assignment. He failed to wake up and acknowledge the call. When he woke up and listened to his VM he checked his schedule (at this point inside 10 hours). He said his schedule showed a "PD" instead of the trip. His schedule also reflected the lower credit for the month as a result. His time card concurred with the schedule. He informed DALPA and he said he was told their are over a hundred cases of pilots getting PDs for failing to acknowledge outside 10 hours. Surely there are others who have complied with the PWA and not the SD policy letter who are not getting paid. Nothing to grieve? YGTBSM

The better answer is our union is holding off from filing a grievance in order to get to an acceptable resolution that works for both sides; that filing a grievance right now would undermine what work has been done and that at present, negotiations favor our side. Where do we stand? Is there a likelihood this is going to an arbitrator? If so, I fail to see the logic in not filing a grievance.

ALPA says "We've heard you want more information and communication." and so we get redundant emails on often what we're already hearing from the company. That or the wolf is at the door. How about giving us an update on where we stand on issues here and now--issues where our PWA is being ignored? Between DALPA loyalists who won't even admit our fellow pilots are being denied pay for complying with our PWA and managers who issue policies usurping our contract no wonder so many of us are frustrated with the status quo.

Well its pretty easy to say there will be zero give and nothing but massive gains. If we can accomplish that, great. C2015 we're getting everything. Case closed, its that easy.

But, if we end up with still marginal work rules or other areas that still need major improvement, how exactly do you see something like that surviving? Again, its not about the occasional pilot screwed out of a prime EU trip and sent on a non commutable trip to the malaria belt while eating hotel rooms and inheriting unplanned commutes on days off. I'm very much in favor of significant protections for OE recovery flying including pay, credit, report, release, theatre and off circadian protections similar to the original trip, plus hotels in domicile mid footprint if necessary. The old system was unacceptable.

By the way, you realize the buddy bid month off trick was obtained with a…*gasp*…concession, right? So in that case it was OK to monetize a concession, particularly one that negatively effects far more pilots than the positive side does. But to reallocate any of that in any way is somehow martyr card worthy. Like I said, they will ask for it, and I don't see 51% of the pilot group fighting to keep that one little but very expensive microperk when we have so many other shortcomings in our pay and work rules over all.

If that's a "give back" then what do you call the many other work rule/rig deficiencies we have now? Do you really think they will all be fixed in 2015 with zero compromise in any area on any thing? Because the issue in question was only obtained via compromise in the first place. Speaking of unilateral take with no give ever under any circumstances, you are aware that we are in 117 negotiations, right? What do you think that is about? We're going to get some things as a result. But we are going to give up some things as well, otherwise the company wouldn't care to have these negotiations in the first place.

So what will we give up? Whatever that ends up being, and I have several ideas actually but that's besides the point, are you fine with keeping the micro empire buddy bid windfall, but OK with whatever we give up? If so, what's the difference?

Slow your roll there, chief. As you recall, prior to all this, we had a 3pm to 2am mandatory schedule check and acknowledgement window that could, and very often did stick first day reserves with 5am shows or short calls. And in NYC that was to any of the 3 airports. As it stands right now absent any agreement, we have nothing before noon on day one...and…nothing has changed with the 3 hours prior acknowledgement window...and…even discounting that, long call is then 19 hours considering you always had the ability to black them out for 9 hours (via the 3 hours prior part, etc).

As for the bolded part, there will be concessions. DALPA is defending the contract and the empty threat of unpaid personal drops for obeying the contract are not sticking. Obviously, that part, even if nothing else, has to go at some point and for very obvious reasons. Will that be a concession? If so, then let's just walk away now because the company clearly isn't going to give us any gains on this while they get nothing in return. You have to take the emotions out of it.

Nothing before noon on day one was part of SD's unilateral fantasy memo, but that part was a huge QOL improvement for reserves. Actually one of, if not the, biggest improvements in the last couple contracts. By far. As in nothing else even came close. That wasn't a gift from SD by any means, but rather a consequence from 117 and our CBA. The part he totally made up and is not binding at all is the fantasy 2 hour rolling leash while on long call. And no, not everyone is bowing down to that contractually illegal interpretation. The company is working very hard to give way, way more notice than that. That is why it may appear there is less pressure or urgency than if we were all hard core 3 hour prior with it.

117 negotiations will give something up, and obviously its the 3 hours prior thing that will be gone in exchange for something else. Nothing before noon on day one better remain though, as should a much longer long call. I like 19 hours as that scales very well with no concession and provides structure for the company while still preserving plenty of circadian "black out" time during a window for rest/safety.

Where is the concession in any of that?

You pointed out zero inconsistencies. I never said the company was going broke. Far from it. The company can afford to give a few guys per category month after month after month off simply for lawyer bidding. Heck they could hire and carry an additional 1000 pilots beyond today's count for the same amount of flying and have a yearly lottery where 1000 pilots get the year off with full pay and still be profitable and not go broke.

The issue is with all the areas in our contract that are still lacking, why are we giving such a tiny micro empire such a massive windfall while the vast majority of lineholders and reserves still need significant improvements elsewhere?

No, the sky isn't falling over this. Far from it. But long before we entertain little windfall empires over this, we need to fix other areas in our work rules. The recovery thing itself was born from a concession, as I'm sure you are aware.

OK, great. But you are aware that the recovery rule in question was gained by agreeing to a concession elsewhere, right? How is that OK?