Do not vote Joe Thomas for C44
10-11-2015 | 06:14 AM
#81
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 2,960
Likes: 0
From: Power top
Calling in sick when you are not then getting paid for it is fraud. You may not like the data but Delta and the Union agree it shows there is a problem that, as a part an agreement, needs to be addressed. I agree that it is the Union's job to support and defend members who work under/within the PWA. If you commit fraud in terms of sick leave abuse and are caught you don't give the Union anything to work with in your defense.
Dalpa's stance on this and other issues is a big reason line pilots are even considering another union. Plus, the arrogant insiders embedded in Dalpa. Do you guys even talk to real line pilots or presume you know what's best?
10-11-2015 | 06:17 AM
#82
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
I'm not familiar with the current contract as I have no dog in this fight, just a curious bystander, but the quickest way to fix fraudulent sick calls is to have no limit on the amount of sick leave you carry over and at retirement get 100% credit for unused sick time. Of course, that costs money, so I'd guess they'll stick with intimidation.
10-11-2015 | 06:19 AM
#83
Line Holder
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
It is pretty clear its Mr Thomas. New profile, only posts on this thread, clarifies the points in his nomination letter, only one defending him...
What isn't clear is why he is so intent on carrying managements water on this one issue. He says those pilots are stealing from his profit sharing check. I wonder exactly how much fraudulent sick claims cost each of us. It might be in the low tens of dollars!
What isn't clear is why he is so intent on carrying managements water on this one issue. He says those pilots are stealing from his profit sharing check. I wonder exactly how much fraudulent sick claims cost each of us. It might be in the low tens of dollars!
Why this one issue? Because the changes were so reasonable and, if implemented, moved toward putting more money in our pockets. Why would we want to continue to make it easy for sick leave abuse, which both sides agree needs to be addressed, to continue?
10-11-2015 | 06:25 AM
#84
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,971
Likes: 0
From: Kickin’ Back
Denny
10-11-2015 | 06:39 AM
#85
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 5,590
Likes: 346
Members who commit sick leave abuse steal from the pilot group by way of added costs associated with their fraud which diminish our profit sharing checks. The verification modifications were an attempt to reduce that fraud ( costs ). One very tangible benefit would have been larger profit sharing checks for us all.
There are 2 sides to the negotiating table. We have one side, they have the other. The fact that we are even arguing this amongst ourselves shows that the company strategy is working. They are dividing us and getting some of our pilots to actually root against us.
10-11-2015 | 06:40 AM
#86
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
From: 5-9 block, kill removing
Joe has laid out his position on different issues by way of his campaign letters. Very well thought out, logical with data to back up his thinking. So, no, I'm not him. He doesn't need my help.
Why this one issue? Because the changes were so reasonable and, if implemented, moved toward putting more money in our pockets. Why would we want to continue to make it easy for sick leave abuse, which both sides agree needs to be addressed, to continue?
Why this one issue? Because the changes were so reasonable and, if implemented, moved toward putting more money in our pockets. Why would we want to continue to make it easy for sick leave abuse, which both sides agree needs to be addressed, to continue?
10-11-2015 | 06:56 AM
#87
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 4,116
Likes: 1
ummm....a little explanation may be in order. you are conflicted about the "both" sides agreeing to it being addressed only because you assume alpa and the pilot group are on the 'same' side.
I have NO doubt "both" sides agreed it needed to be 'addressed'.....the both sides being management...and alpa.
I have NO doubt "both" sides agreed it needed to be 'addressed'.....the both sides being management...and alpa.
10-11-2015 | 07:21 AM
#88
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,816
Likes: 5
From: retired 767(dl)
I'm not familiar with the current contract as I have no dog in this fight, just a curious bystander, but the quickest way to fix fraudulent sick calls is to have no limit on the amount of sick leave you carry over and at retirement get 100% credit for unused sick time. Of course, that costs money, so I'd guess they'll stick with intimidation.
10-11-2015 | 07:24 AM
#89
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,884
Likes: 199
On this we can agree. I call in sick when I am sick and don't expect to need a note from mom. If however everyone did that there would not even be a discussion on the subject.
10-11-2015 | 07:45 AM
#90
Line Holder
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
I'm not familiar with the current contract as I have no dog in this fight, just a curious bystander, but the quickest way to fix fraudulent sick calls is to have no limit on the amount of sick leave you carry over and at retirement get 100% credit for unused sick time. Of course, that costs money, so I'd guess they'll stick with intimidation.
Don't abuse sick leave, the Union can defend you and you can't be intimidated.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
