Laserowner

I don't believe there is sick leave abuse in any significant amount to justify this concession . This is a ploy to force us NOT TO USE our contractually guaranteed sick benefits. They will make it so difficult and cumbersome to call in sick, that we will either A)fly sick, or B)not press the issue when our claim is rejected.

The real savings for the company will be a drop in LEGITIMATE use of sick benefits. Cliff Note version: Thinly-veiled Pilot-Pushing

ghilis101

+1 million

Carl Spackler

Since we're represented by a labor union under the RLA, we're unable to sue the company for the most part. All disputes have to be handled through the grievance process.

Another reason why it is SO CRITICAL to vote this TA down.

Carl

gloopy

I don't think its thinly veiled at all.

Some white paper MBA hack ran some fantasy numbers and started counting savings in staffing and sick time if he could get the number reduced. This TA will do that. It will also increase the frequency of pilots flying sick, but who cares as that's even better for "productivity".

With this TA, if you are sick with anything that a hostile third party can't easily verify according to their criteria, you better go to work, IMSAFE and the regs be damed.

Of course, if anything were to happen and the investigation revealed a pilot flew with anything, even a non third party verifiable grey area condition, they will bring the hammer of pain upon them and their family all the while saying how the pilot should have used their sick time.

I will vote no again and again even if they fix all the other issues because of this one alone. This is a huge safety issue that will push pilots to fly sick sometimes. Even if this TA is voted down, this was supposedly the company's number one wish list item. Version 2 likely won't be much better unless we really make it clear this was a major sticking point.

nohat

How can they compare us to other airlines anyway. If these airlines have c2015 type of sick system then maybe their pilots are flying sick due to the system in place at their airline. Safety is our number one thing BS is told over and over. they go back three years, when did 117 rules kick in, just maybe the abuse of 117, long hours, long days and an elderly pilot group equals increase in sick calls. Maybe the toxic cabin air, constant closed quarters with pax and other crewmembers/FA also leads us to call in sick. Now the FAA raised limits when you can fly after taking otc meds leads to more potential sick calls. Maybe the crappy airport food and unhealthy lifestyle and non-standard sleeping patterns of pilots causes sicknesses but I hardly call any of these abuse.

scambo1

Council 66 put out a letter that said they had investigations on sick leave abuse. Some pilots were investigated. ZERO pilots were found guilty. It's the only letter I have read from a council on the topic.

Yet we now have this new concessionary language. Pattern bargaining down in the most profitable time in history for no reason except that the company wants to control us all with disregard for IMSAFE.

Bad enough for a no by itself.

Now the record keeping and potential change to the role of Deltas AME adds another wrinkle. No one knows where this is headed if it passes, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see there is danger ahead. It's a storm that I would rather fly around than through.

Another standalone NO.

So two elements to vote no in one section.