CBA Trivia
 

With regards to our Collective Bargaining Agreement, what do the following individuals (positions) have in common?





.

all Airbus guys......ones a HS grad.....ones a Navy dude......ones an AF dude......:rolleyes:

A lot of people in our leadership are Airbus guys. Lends some truth to the rumors that during Contract15 the company was rescheduling hard to fill MD lines to the Airbus with willing Airbus pilots flying draft.

Training Review Board
 

With our 2006 Collective Bargaining Agreement, we established a new way of dealing with training failures. Well, it was new to us, but not to the industry. We abandoned the "Train to Failure" mentality and adopted a "Train to Success" strategy. To that end, we established a Training Review Board.



Per the CBA §24 DEFINITIONS, the Training Review Board was "established by the Association and the Company for the purpose of reviewing and making decisions and, where appropriate, referrals and recommendations concerning training." As such, the function of the TRB is one which the vast majority of us will never have to interact with. When your training goes smoothly, as most does, you might not be interested in how the TRB is comprised or how it operates.

However, for those among us, our fellow brothers and sisters, who for whatever reason encounter speed bumps during training, the TRB suddenly becomes very important, and critical to our futures. It's an aspect of our CBA which we hope we'll never need to use, but when we do need it, we'll be forever grateful for its existence. Indeed, there are a substantial number of current pilots who have its existence to thank for the part played by the TRB in their eventual training successes.


Continuing from the CBA, "The TRB shall be comprised of two members each from the Association and the Company." Having an equal number of members representing both parties means neither has an explicit advantage in decision-making by virtue of numbers. It means the two "sides" will need to come to an agreement, ideally even a consensus. Otherwise, they must elevate the matter to a higher authority to break the tie. (More about that later.) "The TRB members shall consist of the MEC Training Committee Chairman, the MEC Pilot Assistance Group Chairman, the Company's Managing Director of Air Operations Training and the Senior Manager of Flight Standards." There's the first two of the positions I asked about in Post #1. The four positions which compose the Training Review Board represent a broad spectrum of experience, expertise, and knowledge about not only the aviation profession in general, but our airline, our system form, our training programs, and our high standards.

But more than that, each of the four must meet one additional, very important requirement. Both the Association and the Company recognized and agreed through the language of this paragraph the value to both parties that each member of the TRB must also be a member of a very exclusive club: the Federal Express Pilots' Master Seniority List. It's not an option, not a suggestion -- it's a requirement.

"If any of the Company's members are not on the Federal Express Pilots' Master Seniority List, the Company will appoint a TRB member who is on the Federal Express Pilots' Master Seniority List."

Let us understand the significance of this provision. What we, the Association and the Company, have agreed is that it is MORE important for a member of the TRB to hold a seniority number than it is to be the Managing Director of Air Operations Training. It is MORE important for a member of the TRB to be on the Master Seniority List than to be the Senior Manager of Flight Standards. Stated otherwise, the Managing Director of Air Operations Training and the Manger of Flight Standards are NOT QUALIFIED to sit on the Training Review Board if they are not on the Federal Express Pilots' Master Seniority List.

Do you not think having a seniority number is a significant thing?

Note also the remedy for the situation where either of the two individuals in those positions is disqualified from participation on the TRB by virtue of the fact they are not on the seniority list. The remedy is for them to be replaced. The remedy is NOT to arbitrarily give them a number on the seniority list and send them through New Hire training and an Initial Course, never to actually fly the line. To do so would defeat the purpose of establishing this criterion in the first place. Furthermore, it would dilute the value of having a place on the seniority list.


So, where does the third position, the System Chief Pilot, come in? We have to go the Training section of the CBA to see how the Training Review Board functions.

CBA §11.H. The Training Review Board (TRB)

But before we get to the System Chief Pilot's role in the TRB, I want to take a moment to focus on the first paragraph of the section. As I mentioned above, most of us have never and will never deal with a TRB. In fact, I would venture to say most of us have never even read about the TRB. So, please indulge me as I quote the first paragraph. It emphasizes the importance of the TRB and the train to proficiency philosophy we adopted when we ratified the 2006 CBA. Perhaps we can gain a better appreciation of the value of adopting this enlightened approach and of the TRB.

"1. General Decision-Making

The TRB is established to resolve situations involving individual pilot in training.

The TRB shall be governed by a train to proficiency philosophy for pilots in training. Individual pilots will be dealt with on a case by case basis, without regard to past precedent. If reasonable progress is being made and there is reason to believe the pilot will ultimately be successful, training is usually extended. The overall goal of the TRB is the continuing improvement and quality assurance of the Company's training program. The TRB shall make its decisions and recommendations based on consensus (i.e., Consensus of the Training Review Board)."

We, the pilots, have a critical stake in this process. When somebody encounters difficulty in training for whatever reason, be it the training program itself, a health issue, an environmental obstacle, or anything else, the TRB operating under the train to proficiency philosophy can facilitate success in situations where previously a pilot's career might have been prematurely ended. The Company has a critical stake in the process, that being the quality assurance of the Company's training program.

There again, improving the training program is an improvement for the pilots. And since we all benefit from improved training programs, we all benefit, even if only indirectly, from the existence of the Training Review Board and the train to proficiency philosophy.

OK, now to the System Chief Pilot ...

CBA §11.H. The Training Review Board (TRB)

"6. In the absence of a consensus concerning the TRB recommended actions, the SCP shall use his best efforts to broker a consensus among the members of the TRB. In the event consensus cannot then be reached, the SCP shall determine the resolution."

Sure, we'd like to achieve consensus, but this is life, and the "we vs. them" dynamic is hard to eradicate. So if there's a stalemate, the System Chief Pilot plays a huge role. He could theoretically overrule the recommendation of the Company's Managing Director of Air Operations Training and the Senior Manager of Flight Standards. That's some pretty serious horsepower.

But wait, there's an exception.

"In the event the SCP is not on the Master Seniority List, the Company shall assign the SCP a seniority number and he shall audit a New Hire Basic Indoctrination course and an Initial Training Course."



The Association and the Company, in ratifying this CBA, agreed that having a Seniority Number is an important qualification for participating in this process, even making the ultimate decision when the TRB cannot reach consensus. However, they also recognized the Company's right to hand out Seniority Numbers to whomever they please, regardless of previous employment, experience, or ability to meet the same standards required of pilot hired off the street.

No, wait. That's NOT how it reads. That's not what is said. That's the "Alternate Universe" version. Here's the REAL version:

"In the event the SCP is not on the Master Seniority List, the Company shall designate a member who is on the Master Seniority List to perform these functions."

It's hard to overstate the significance of a Seniority Number when one considers that the SCP could be the ultimate decider of a pilot's fate, even perhaps overruling two highly-placed members of the Company's Management structure, but ONLY IF he/she is on the Federal Express Pilots' Master Seniority List. It is MORE IMPORTANT, then, that the arbiter have a Seniority Number, than it is that he/she be the SCP.


Now, tell me how giving away Seniority Numbers is no big deal.



Oh, and in one more twist ...

"7. If a pilot disagrees with the TRB's decision, the pilot may appeal such to the SCP."

There's no mention of Master Seniority List in this paragraph. Theoretically, I suppose, all three of the Company's players might be replaced by designees with seniority numbers, and if the pilot disagrees with the decision, his final appeal might be to the SCP without an seniority number. I hope that was not the intent.






.

What, if any control does FDX ALPA currently have on who does/does not get a seniority number?

Also, do any of the legacy carriers’ unions have a say in who is given a seniority number?

Is this an issue at any other carrier? I believe that ALL managers at UPS are not on the seniority list.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What ALPA can do, in fact is obligated to do, is defend the Collective Bargaining Agreement, and protect our profession. We have a long-established practice, in fact a well-documented precedent, of only including on the Federal Express Pilots' Master Seniority List those PILOTS who are selected and hired after applying for employment as PILOTS. We have never given a seniority number to a NON-PILOT, which, according to the CBA definition of PILOT, our VP of Flight Operations was not.

(CBA§2.106. PILOT A Captain, First Officer or Second Officer covered by this Agreement, employed by the Company, and whose name appears on the Master Seniority List.)



Good question, and I don't know the answer. I'm not sure the answer is relevant, but I'm still interested in knowing. Maybe someone who surrendered a seniority number from another carrier in order to be hired as a pilot and receive a seniority number here can chime in with that information.

I don't know the details of the UPS Pilots' CBA, but I know that OUR CBA (§1.B.3.) prohibits non-seniority number holders from operating revenue flights.






.

Bravo Tony!!!

I agree with you that this is a big deal. This is a first, and I think it is a bad precedent.

Is there any airline whose pilots decide the hiring process (application, testing, interviews), minimum qualifications, or recency of experience? Can Fedex management legally change the process and qualifications for one individual? Does the Fedex pilots’ contract say anything about these things?

It seems to me that TL meets all of our pilot hiring qualifications except one: recency of experience. He was a 737 Capt at SW, MCO Chief pilot and VP of flight ops before he came here. While I am not at all in favor of what just occurred I don’t see what can be done about it. Seniority was not abrogated; he was given a new hire seniority number. Perhaps it can be incorporated in the next CBA but I don’t see what’s to stop the company under our current rules.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Funny thing is that people are saying that the company can hire who they want. Was he hired as a pilot or was he given a seniority number? There is a big difference.