Originally Posted by flyallnite (Post 1652288)

You probably won't have to wait long for the magnificent b%4tard who stands in the middle of the lounge, and speaks on his mobile phone at a volume that would be appropriate for a presentation. The topics range from "I need some mulch" to "My ATV is in Beaufort and I need to get my trailer back from my brother in law before I can pick it up". He's there every time I have a sit!:(

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1652386)

Hmmm, flamebait. Ironic.



Which is why I didn't call because my guys would have felt obligated to call back. I wanted them to enjoy a few days peace.

Anyway, had a good conversation with my rep today. Here's a quick synopsis:

1. CDO's originated from a special select sub committee of the scheduling committee, not a 4 year old defeated LEC resolution. The subcommittee inserted CDO's into the negotiating wish list. Reps found out about CDO's during their initial meetings to give direction. The reps' direction included strict limitations and provisions to any CDO's. the TA did not include those limits. Reps that were upset about their guidance being ignored were bolstered by a nearly record flood of angry emails and calls. After initially fighting the MEC, the NC went back to the company and made the changes.

2. No mention of a pay no credit lookback between now and November.

3. MEC nearly equally split on need for MEMRAT. interesting that its a philosophical split and not a split along north/south.

4. Acknowledgement that given the volumes of MEC communication, pilots were not communicated with regarding what was being negotiated.

5. The logic as to how CDO's became part of 117 (fatigue regulations) negotiations was because CDO's are covered in FAR 117. This was the open door used by the scheduling subcommittee to insert them into our opening position.

6. Company considered CDO's to be zero cost. Yet when we returned to ask for removal of them, the company gave their removal from the already signed TA to cost $4 million. So the loss of one hour to the long call leash and other stuff was determined by the company to be required to make them whole for their new additional cost of 4 million to remove CDO's that were a zero cost item when negotiations began.

Lots more stuff but this is already too long. MEC still very divided philosophically between guys like the CVG chairman who openly stated: 'we don't need MEMRAT because pilots don't have the time or the knowledge capacity to understand this stuff. That's why they hire us' ... and guys who believe just the opposite. No changes to that seen anytime soon

Carl

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1652386)

Anyway, had a good conversation with my rep today. Here's a quick synopsis:

Lots more stuff but this is already too long. MEC still very divided philosophically between guys like the CVG chairman who openly stated: 'we don't need MEMRAT because pilots don't have the time or the knowledge capacity to understand this stuff. That's why they hire us' ... and guys who believe just the opposite. No changes to that seen anytime soon

Carl

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler (Post 1652386)

Anyway, had a good conversation with my rep today. Here's a quick synopsis:

1. CDO's originated from a special select sub committee of the scheduling committee, not a 4 year old defeated LEC resolution. The subcommittee inserted CDO's into the negotiating wish list. Reps found out about CDO's during their initial meetings to give direction. The reps' direction included strict limitations and provisions to any CDO's. the TA did not include those limits. Reps that were upset about their guidance being ignored were bolstered by a nearly record flood of angry emails and calls. After initially fighting the MEC, the NC went back to the company and made the changes.

2. No mention of a pay no credit lookback between now and November.

3. MEC nearly equally split on need for MEMRAT. interesting that its a philosophical split and not a split along north/south.

4. Acknowledgement that given the volumes of MEC communication, pilots were not communicated with regarding what was being negotiated.

5. The logic as to how CDO's became part of 117 (fatigue regulations) negotiations was because CDO's are covered in FAR 117. This was the open door used by the scheduling subcommittee to insert them into our opening position.

6. Company considered CDO's to be zero cost. Yet when we returned to ask for removal of them, the company gave their removal from the already signed TA to cost $4 million. So the loss of one hour to the long call leash and other stuff was determined by the company to be required to make them whole for their new additional cost of 4 million to remove CDO's that were a zero cost item when negotiations began.

Lots more stuff but this is already too long. MEC still very divided philosophically between guys like the CVG chairman who openly stated: 'we don't need MEMRAT because pilots don't have the time or the knowledge capacity to understand this stuff. That's why they hire us' ... and guys who believe just the opposite. No changes to that seen anytime soon

Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 1652397)

However with 7 SC's and staffing to the bone anyway, there won't be a whole lot of day one LC's anyway.

Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 1652423)

Also, if the TA required a 7 day review period, and on the 11th hour of the 7th day they decided to significantly modify it and then pass it instantly without MEMRAT, does that comply with the 7 day review period?

I mean, what if it was a TA for a 40% pay raise and nothing else. On day 7 they change it to a 10% pay cut and pass it. Does the 7 days apply to *that* TA, or just any TA?

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1652447)

Were the CDOs paying 7.5 hours total or was it 7.5 hours per day?