New TA
10-29-2015 | 07:12 AM
#191
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
From: 7ER Capt
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
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
10-29-2015 | 09:58 AM
#192
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,353
Likes: 54
From: 765A
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.
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.
10-29-2015 | 10:23 AM
#193
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
From: 7ER Capt
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
10-29-2015 | 10:49 AM
#194
Straight QOL, homie
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,202
Likes: 1
From: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
10-29-2015 | 01:24 PM
#195
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,353
Likes: 54
From: 765A
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
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
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.
10-29-2015 | 01:54 PM
#198
Racketeer
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 13,327
Likes: 817
From: N60.4858 W149.9327
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.
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.
Last edited by notEnuf; 10-29-2015 at 02:17 PM.
10-29-2015 | 02:01 PM
#199
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,263
Likes: 105
From: DAL 330
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
