Well since it's unscientific why don't we have the poll taken by DALPA released? Someone must have the key to the lockbox it's in. Would love to see this "scientific" poll. No one would ask for a reduction of any $$$ when the company is making record profits.

Sick time is for times you are sick. And sick means when you are unable to legally self certify to fly. That includes a ton of times when some 3rd party hatchet man won't always be able to "verify" your upset stomach or nausea or squirts or headache or sore back or whatever. Not all "sick" time is for an easily verifiable flu. And even an easily verifiable flu isn't easy to verify if you don't go bow before a suspicious and potentially hostile 3rd party during the peak of your symptoms.

This is a huge safety issue.

Not only that, the nonsense that the group being 3 years older should only account for 0.1% more sick leave is insane. Medical issues increase exponentially in your final 3 years, not a combines 0.1% increase. I suspect to get that fantasy number they took the average age of the entire group including all the new hires which drastically lowers the average.

In any case, this new policy is a huge assault on our ability to self certify and it WILL result in many, many more pilots flying sick and result in less safety in a supposed attempt to crack down on a handful of "abusers" who will likely continue to "abuse" it anyway because many of them already have the medical stuff already in place to call out whenever they want anyway and there's nothing anyone can do about that.

This is a horrible policy and reason enough to vote no.

You people are all idiots. Read your current contract section 15B. The new sick leave is only about changing the 100 hour requirement to a day's missed requirement. If there weren't people abusing the system right now then we wouldn't be discussing this. I've had captains tell me without my asking about times they called in sick and weren't sick. You know you're out there and I think the ones most upset about this are guilty parties. Where's the integrity in that huh?

It might be in your company email. I remember seeing something from chitchat there one time. I rarely look at that email account.

Who are all these people?

There is suppose to be a notepad coming out covering this and it should only be retroactive to June 1 (our sick time recharge date). TA still sucks and vote no but the look back is not true

BS. If there were people abusing the system, they'd be terminated. People aren't being terminated. End of story. Regarding the rest of your post, there's much more to this now. Read the actual TA language and see for yourself.

Carl - the idiot

That is not the case. There is no such language in this TA referencing a retroactive limit back only to June 1 or only to the sick recharge date. Just the 1 year and 3 year lookback provisions themselves.

Carl

If you think the only change is going from a 100 hour limit to a day limit YOU are the idiot. Go read the contract language and bullet points.

Never used more than 85 hours of sick time per year since working here. Under the new proposed system so far I would never have had to have the DHS verify a sick call so claiming that those against this are "abusers" is not fair. This is a big NO for me. What happens in C2018? Scheduling not allowed to approve a sick call so we have to call the DHS office to get approved to go out on sick leave for a trip? Very slippery slope that we don't want to go down here.

Thanks for your time, but I don't need a neg. notepad, a roadshow, or a rep to tell me about the sick policy. I've read the language in the TA and unless it is changed I will vote no. This is one of 4 issues I have with the TA. The only issue I need a neg. notepad and rep info on is the EASK to block hour change. Other than that, I understand the sick policy, LCA bid pulling, and PS swap without a roadshow or neg. notepad. Unless those change (which they won't) my vote is a NO.