I think that is one factor that drives our usage stats upwards. However, we can now call in well on day 3 of 5 and we will still get paid for the entire trip if we don't WS to make time up. Under the old rules when you called in well you HAD to WS or you lost time so nobody ever called in well until prior to the next rotation.

I know my sick time usage went up some when the 5-day rotations showed up. I've never been sick for two rotations in a row so before, the maximum I ever used in a sick call was around 20-21 hours maybe. Now if I sick out for a 5-day it can be 28-32 hours. How many guys call in well on day 3 then toss in a WS? I'd bet almost none.

They are also tracking sick DAYS which include days off that you don't call in well. So say you have a 2-day with 7 days off after that. You call in sick and don't call in well until the day prior to your next trip and you show sick for 9 days. I'm not sure why they are tracking that now, but they do.

If they were good managers, they would show us the detailed data and what they are looking at. If we are using more because none of us call in well on days off, then most of us will start doing so. Maybe we should all be calling in well on day 3 of 5 even though we know we won't WS to make up the time? None of us really know what they are tracking and what they mean when they say we use more sick time than our peers.

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LC9GrOvxFKo/hqdefault.jpg

Open time goes in, death beam comes out. Pity the crewmember who gets in its way.

Exactly.

Can't we just tell them we would rather not come in for an interview based upon non-contractual "productivity" issues? So if my D0 and D14 stats on the new PAS are say 40% do I really need to come in and have an interview with them?

So what if coverage is good and I drop half my trips? The only side business they have any right to ask me about is if I'm running a competing aviation business. Other than that, they have no right to interview me about my side business activity.

If you took a survey of those running a business on the side 98% of us will say we do it because we no longer have the ability to make the money we thought we were going to make and have the pension we thought we were going to have. I think all the smart pilots realized having all your career eggs in one basket was not a smart move. A minimum month for me is a no vote on C2015.

I think this is an important thought.

The company is fabricating a crisis--instilling a sense of paranoia and making us look defensively over our shoulders instead of focusing on the fact that the company is wildly profitable and we don't need to concede a THING.

I'm also guilty of biting on the company's manufactured hysteria instead of winding my watch.

Record profits. No concessions. No need to fan the company's attempt to manipulate us.

You're right, I did see that. The vague, ominous feeling I got from it was overshadowed by the vague, ominous feeling I got from the PAS, which was itself overtaken by a more pronounced ominous feeling over the "interviews".

I guess we're only waiting for the next evolutions of the "Inside" series: "Inside You", "Inside You Too", and "Deep Inside You". They're almost there. Hell, thanks to UHC, they're probably there already.

1984 isn't that far ahead.

From my reps who were on the conference call. The reps made it extremely clear that profit sharing was not authorized to be changed. The NC didn't have the authority to do what they did. The reps were as clear as they could have been.

Carl

Then either you're a liar, your reps are liars or you misunderstood. Which specific rep told you that TT, SS or DM, because I was on that conference call too and what you are saying is a lie.

No, you just need to realize like Dennis Miller, sometimes jokes are meant for a narrow group. It doesn't make them less funny. :D

Carl

Posted from inside scambo's unopened Surface Pro 2 box.

TT and SS. I didn't talk to Drew.

I don't think you were on the call reroute. If you were, you would have heard clear unambiguous language agreed to by every rep that profit sharing was not to be traded without further authorization from the reps. That authorization never came before TA2012 was signed by the NC. For you to now claim that didn't happen is a ridiculous attempt at revisionist history. I don't know who you are or what role you played on that call, but you weren't listening...if you were even there.

Carl

This is why being represented by a far left liberal political organization is difficult for us. We had 33 house republican members join the fight against NAI. Yet we have folks like pilotc90a question their integrity and motivation. This is why conservatives just look the other way with "labor" issues. Labor is so wedded to the far left, you get slapped even when you try to help.

Try to ease up on the thoughtless hate man.

Carl