Here's the thing.... We are basically asking for a raise.

What person would work for a company that says:

"Sure we're making more money than at any time in the history of our busines, and of course we'd love to give you a raise...

BUT, we are going to have to take other stuff away from your current contract to pay for it."

I don't suspect said company would have much luck attracting and keeping talent.

Folks, we are making RIDICULOUS amounts of money!

NOW is the time for RESTORATION!

Sam DeRosa
0961094 (Scott Martin write-in)
Jimmy Johnson
Chris Kern

I fully understand why the company wanted the changes.

Some of the yes voters like to say what was the big deal, access to records is already in the contract. That is a partially true statement. Yes it is there, but no they can't use it as a way to combat sick leave abuse. I'm simply pointing out the difference. Though it is present in the current contract, it's inclusion in the TA represented a large change. Don't blow it off and tell me it's no big deal cause it's already there.

That said I do think there is a sick leave abuse problem, one that has to be addressed. I didn't like the solution that was in the TA, but I fully expect it to be addressed one way or another in any future TA.

Good grief!

We are maxing out on EVERY performance metric...

We are making more money than has EVER been made in ALL the history of airlines...

And you want to "solve" the companies perceived "sick leave abuse" problem?... Because they say so?

There is absolutely NOT a sick leave "abuse" problem... there is a "company perceived" sick leave use problem.

The amount of pilots "abusing" sick leave is statistically insignificant... and the company already has plenty of tools to address those individuals.

NO CONCESSIONS!

RESTORATION NOW!

Sam DeRosa
0961094 (Scott Martin write-in)
Jimmy Johnson
Chris Kern

What would happen if every Delta pilot applied to [fed ex, SWA, American]?

Would it be a permissible activity to coodinate?

I don't care how insignificant you consider it to be. I have seen guys get green slips I would have received had they not sicked out of a trip. Then I went back and looked at previous months only to see the same thing......sick out of a four day, tues-fri trip only to magically get well in time for a Sat-Sun green slip. I don't care if it happens very few times, once time is too many. That's not a company problem, that's our problem.

At a minimum a trip not flown due to sick leave should count just as if you had flown in terms of white or greenslip pick up.

simple fix.....call in sick...ineligible for any gs in the sick call trip footprint.

Sick leave management is the company's problem.
If they want to offer a few tweaks....what are they willing to give up for that?

Is that abuse or circumventing the intent of the contractual language? If it is circumventing intent, then it's permissible, apparently. :rolleyes:

How about back of the line for a GS? This was actually something that the TA had right. This will not affect the number of Greenslips at all but may occasionally prevent the contract Ninjas from jumping to the head of the GS line.

Scoop

that would penalize a sick call event pilot for the entire month.