no! No! And no!!!!!!!

Can you expound on your thoughts, please?

1) Flying over vacation is a huge staffing concession on our part!

2) Less upward movement as a result of the lower staffing required.

3) Let the junior guys who want time off in the summer have the summer vacations...if the senior guys choose to go fly and make the summer money, don't bid the summer vacations and green slip/w/conflict under our current contract!

Sorry, I don't like this idea at all.

One thing I've learned is that, if you are good, you can contract anything you want.


So, do you like the idea, if I attach a clause that stipulates that if pilots are allowed to fly on some vacation days, hiring MUST continue at 150-200 new hires per month, no displacements, and staffing levels must remain the same, or better, for all fleets and seats -- oh yeah, and let's give guys and extra APD, that is not lose it or lose it, for every time they fly on vacation?


Do you still not like that idea at all, or are you willing to listen and negotiate? ;)

Vacation time is for vacation.

idk what metric you want to use to 'monetize' time off.... the end result will be the same.

We will end up with less of both. We have seen this movie before.

First thought: How would this affect the number of greenslips going out, if some pilots flew more during their vacation days?

Some history: Back in our POS 96 contract pilots were allowed to 'pre sell' up to 50% of their vacation, take the money and half the vacation time. This was prior to PBS of course, back when we had trips touching vacation. The senior guys who had the most vacation (6 weeks) sold it.

This caused huge stagnation at the top, because they had the most vacation to sell.

Guess what else happened?

Sick leave usage went way up!

Guess who was calling in sick more?

The very same guys who sold back half their vacation!

Win Win!

We got rid of it in our 2000 contract for many reasons, but screwing the junior guys who had little vacation to sell, was most of it.

With PBS guys are already flying just as much as ever in their vacation months, because vacation time doesn't count against your max pick up limits after your line award. Guys are able to WS MORE time in their vacation months, than in a regular month! Now you want to make it easier to work more? Isn't 92 hours a month enough? :rolleyes:

I'd vote no to it, just like I did in 1996.

New,
Is this Holiday humor? Absolutely no. Feet to the fire until we're restored.

Hank,

Hey now.

75 hours max bid award, vaca touching trips, 6hrs vacation (pay and credit), 5:15 min calendar day (training, flying, whatever), 5 short calls/month max. Then we can talk about voluntarily flying on vacation for GSWC only (paid for vacation days lost plus premium pay for the trip), with a SnapBack if hiring falls below 100(or a better number)/month.

on second thought, never mind. let's make some gains without giving anything back.

I don't think we should sell vacation. My thought is that the vacation pilots would go to the bottom of the list, behind white slips -- maybe a day, or two out.

Here's the deal. Look at the survey.


I'm looking at questions, #12, #22, #26, & #33. I can see where this is leading to and it's not good. To me, it looks like we are being set up for a little bit less crap, for a little more pay. Look at those questions and tell me you don't agree.


Like I've always said, just like we want stuff, I think the company needs stuff. I'm willing to give to get more in return, as long as it's optional for us, and we have protections to ensure we aren't taken advantage of.

I'll consider anything so as not to suffer the embarrassment of my union bringing back a crap sandwich and the DPA just being nice enough to bite their tongues so as not to say they told me so (Thanks Carl.)

Is this idea better, or worse than the union bring back some watered down version of the sick leave, FO/LCA flying, or JV/Scope from the first TA? Neither is great, but if one is better than the other, let the union know.

Sorry dude, this flying over vacation is not a good idea. If presented in a TA or other similar concessions, I will vote No again. Thanks for trying...