![]() |
|
Originally Posted by Myfingershurt
(Post 2803525)
What’s the deal with May FO lines? CA’s came out two days ago and we still got nothing.
Hear! Hear! I say the new contract needs an update to the bidding timeline: 3rd - Bids Open 9th - Bids Close 14th - Awards Posted * Bs shall be posted within 24 hours of captains. |
Originally Posted by crazyjaydawg
(Post 2803639)
Hear! Hear!
I say the new contract needs an update to the bidding timeline: 3rd - Bids Open 9th - Bids Close 14th - Awards Posted * Bs shall be posted within 24 hours of captains. |
Originally Posted by Express pilot
(Post 2803423)
It improves QOL for the guy on reserve and if they can’t cover the trip in base, it goes to a GS in base.
Don't think the negotiators are going to be wasting much time pursuing that fantasy. Might as well say "QOL" by demanding premium pay for driving to work during rush hour. I mean doesn't that impact your "QOL?" We need to work hard on improving the quality of our trips as we fly them (improved DH language, which has been mentioned recently, is a great example) and that is where we need to place our emphasis. Trying to restrict the company's ability to run the trip coverage sequence as it currently exists will take a bit more effort. By the way, I agree that there are a few areas there which should be improved (such as the ability the company has to assign a trip to a reserve that conflicts with his regular line days off in the next month, all for no premium pay, when they could not do that if it interfered with his reserve days off!...that should never have been in the contract to begin with. However, that is not the same as just saying "reserves can only cover in base trips, period." |
Originally Posted by Herkflyr
(Post 2803757)
So "QOL" (what a ridiculous term...sort of like "inclusion" it is used so much in a flippant manner that no one really even knows what it means) now means that a reserve should not be able to be used by the company as a...reserve...so more guys in base can get premium pay to fly a trip that is easily assignable to a reserve and has been for decades prior?
Don't think the negotiators are going to be wasting much time pursuing that fantasy. Might as well say "QOL" by demanding premium pay for driving to work during rush hour. I mean doesn't that impact your "QOL?" We need to work hard on improving the quality of our trips as we fly them (improved DH language, which has been mentioned recently, is a great example) and that is where we need to place our emphasis. Trying to restrict the company's ability to run the trip coverage sequence as it currently exists will take a bit more effort. By the way, I agree that there are a few areas there which should be improved (such as the ability the company has to assign a trip to a reserve that conflicts with his regular line days off in the next month, all for no premium pay, when they could not do that if it interfered with his reserve days off!...that should never have been in the contract to begin with. However, that is not the same as just saying "reserves can only cover in base trips, period." I could be in a very small minority, but I could theoretically vote yes to a contract that increases PWA value by a billion dollars without touching pay rates. An increasing percentage of us have decades left and aren't topped out on anything yet (longevity, sick leave, vacation, category seniority). I'd like to strike now and insert QOL items into the PWA that will be hard to extricate in the years ahead. Our payrates generally won't wander far from industry standard, IMHO. And PS captures profitability if we remain an industry leader. |
Originally Posted by TED74
(Post 2803764)
I could be in a very small minority, but I could theoretically vote yes to a contract that increases PWA value by a billion dollars without touching pay rates. An increasing percentage of us have decades left and aren't topped out on anything yet (longevity, sick leave, vacation, category seniority). I'd like to strike now and insert QOL items into the PWA that will be hard to extricate in the years ahead. Our payrates generally won't wander far from industry standard, IMHO. And PS captures profitability if we remain an industry leader.
While section 6 negotiations are the "primary" source of improvements, in the past we have secured a lot of improvements outside of it. Keep the emails to your reps flowing, if you want to influence them. They are the ones who direct the negotiators, etc. |
Originally Posted by Myfingershurt
(Post 2803754)
Wouldn’t do any good. That would be just another contract item that would continuously be violated with no real repercussions.
The few times they have been released late was due to something inadvertantly being illegal or missed. You want to change the time line,go ahead, But one of the few things that seem to consistently work well is the awarding of our schedules. Now the PBS interface/webapp is another discussion.:eek: |
The May B's are out!!!!!!
|
Originally Posted by TED74
(Post 2803764)
There's nothing ridiculous about the term QOL... just thinking that it has a narrow definition, or that anyone's personal definition is universal for everyone. For me, QOL items are any contractual changes that aren't explicitly or solely compensation (e.g., pay rates, vacation/training valuation, etc).
I could be in a very small minority, but I could theoretically vote yes to a contract that increases PWA value by a billion dollars without touching pay rates. An increasing percentage of us have decades left and aren't topped out on anything yet (longevity, sick leave, vacation, category seniority). I'd like to strike now and insert QOL items into the PWA that will be hard to extricate in the years ahead. Our payrates generally won't wander far from industry standard, IMHO. And PS captures profitability if we remain an industry leader. |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 2803911)
Costing is the biggest single part of contract negotiations. The company and union cost out every single item. In the end the company wants to have a reasonably competitive cost per block hour for pilots. Within that number they really don’t care where the money is spent.
Denny |
Originally Posted by Denny Crane
(Post 2803917)
And here is the reason for Ed’s comment that he will/wants to wait for United and AA to come to a contract agreement before us. If they don’t then he knows Delta will have to pony up big time. Whereas if he waits he can point to them and claim we will be non competitive if we get what we are asking for....
Denny |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:50 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands