China pairing = disputed?
03-05-2020, 09:08 AM
#1
Not a real airline pilot
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2016
Position: Cargo > Pax
Posts: 365
China pairing = disputed?
Educate a new guy.
Picking up a disputed pairing from open time is bad, right? These should go to reserve?
ALPA sent out some word in the last week that China will be labeled “disputed”.
So we are bad boys if we pick up an XTRA pairing with China in it? Or being awarded a China pairing out of the bid pack? Seems unavoidable for 777, maybe avoidable for MD.
Not trying to start a ****ing match. Just haven’t been in property long enough to see regular disputed pairings. Thanks.
Picking up a disputed pairing from open time is bad, right? These should go to reserve?
ALPA sent out some word in the last week that China will be labeled “disputed”.
So we are bad boys if we pick up an XTRA pairing with China in it? Or being awarded a China pairing out of the bid pack? Seems unavoidable for 777, maybe avoidable for MD.
Not trying to start a ****ing match. Just haven’t been in property long enough to see regular disputed pairings. Thanks.
03-05-2020, 11:04 AM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2005
Posts: 1,273
Originally Posted by DirtyPurple
Educate a new guy.
Picking up a disputed pairing from open time is bad, right? These should go to reserve?
ALPA sent out some word in the last week that China will be labeled “disputed”.
So we are bad boys if we pick up an XTRA pairing with China in it? Or being awarded a China pairing out of the bid pack? Seems unavoidable for 777, maybe avoidable for MD.
Not trying to start a ****ing match. Just haven’t been in property long enough to see regular disputed pairings. Thanks.
Picking up a disputed pairing from open time is bad, right? These should go to reserve?
ALPA sent out some word in the last week that China will be labeled “disputed”.
So we are bad boys if we pick up an XTRA pairing with China in it? Or being awarded a China pairing out of the bid pack? Seems unavoidable for 777, maybe avoidable for MD.
Not trying to start a ****ing match. Just haven’t been in property long enough to see regular disputed pairings. Thanks.
03-05-2020, 11:21 AM
#3
Not a real airline pilot
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2016
Position: Cargo > Pax
Posts: 365
Originally Posted by Sluggo_63
AFAIK, the China trips are just coded as "disputed" to ensure that the SLG doesn't assign them without specifically asking for it. It is not "disputed" in the traditional sense of SIG/PSIT disputed.
Thanks...I’m not looking for a China trip, but it’s weird how the KIX standbys are being built for the MD.
03-05-2020, 08:16 PM
#4
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2018
Posts: 1,838
Originally Posted by DirtyPurple
Thanks...I’m not looking for a China trip, but it’s weird how the KIX standbys are being built for the MD.
This afternoon,MEC Chairman Pete Harmon met with VP of Flight Operations Tim Leonard to discuss the use of the Premium Plaza Lounge in TPE. This meeting followed our CBA negotiated dispute process for hotels in section 5.B.4.b.ii. Unfortunately, this process does not lend itself to an immediate resolution. Having considered the information discussed during the meeting, we remain firm in our stance that this facility is substandard per the CBA and ought to be immediately discontinued.
We believe Covid-19 created the need for creative scheduling. Instead of revising our system form, the Company placed the burden on the backs of the pilots. In response to the virus, Taiwan instituted restrictions on entry for those who have been in Hong Kong, Macau, or China in the previous 14 days. This applies to many of our FedEx bid pack trips in the MD-11, HKG-767, and 777. The Company began using the Plaza Lounge inside of the immigration area of the terminal to bypass the restriction against processing through immigration.
The Plaza Lounge has single rooms and double rooms. The single rooms do not have an en-suite bathroom. The double rooms do. Initially, the Company did not ensure that pilots were booked in a double room. That situation has been rectified as now the Company essentially reserved all of the rooms in the Plaza Lounge; meaning with very few exceptions only FedEx pilots will be staying in these rooms in the weeks ahead. Nonetheless, many problems still exist with this facility.
We know it is frustrating to read communications from Company leadership about how you should rest, eat well, exercise and avoid crowds as a way to avoid illness. This simply doesn't recognize the reality of the lives of FedEx pilots working through these difficult conditions. We presented the issues that you provided to us through the PDR system. Most concerning is the fatigue factor caused by noise from multiple sources that interrupt your sleep. We are also concerned about the lack of an exercise facility, reliance on buffet-style eating, and the inability to go anywhere outside of the lounge other than a terminal full of passengers. It is clear from your PDRs that the use of this lounge is having a significant negative impact on the overall safe operation.
While Management assures us they are continuing to seek a means for our pilots to enter Taiwan, they have taken steps to mitigate issues associated with the Plaza Lounge. However, these mitigation efforts have been limited to matters within the facility. At the end of the day, the Plaza Lounge remains the Plaza Lounge – a short term respite for airline passengers who are not in the business of piloting airplanes throughout Asia or around the world. It can never be a proper layover hotel for FedEx pilots.
We believe that changes to the schedule are the only answer as the Plaza Lounge will never be the type of facility that we require to operate safely. We realize that these are unique circumstances, but that is exactly why changes to the schedule must occur. Management has repeatedly thanked you for going above and beyond to get FedEx through this crisis. They need to do the same for you. No effort should be spared to ensure your ability to operate safely.
Without management being willing to change the system, this lounge is integral to every pairing that lays over in TPE. To that end, ALPA has disputed pairings which include TPE layovers. The dispute process is not a solution and will have uneven results. The number of trips disputed may exceed the number of disputes that can be withheld from the bid pack. Please read our previous communication that contains an example explanation of the traditional dispute process. Your PDRs were the ultimate drivers for the issues we raised with the Company. We are determined to continue the dispute of this facility along with any other facility we deem inappropriate. The bottom line is that safety, as defined by the line pilots, must be served.
APRIL 2020 DISPUTED PAIRINGS
Traditional Disputed Pairings
There are two tracks for disputes: System Chief Pilot and Fatigue Risk Management Group Tracks. Please refer to the CBA 25.BB.E for clarification of both tracks. The following pairings are disputed under the System Chief Pilot Track. Within CBA restrictions, disputed pairings on the SCP track are not placed on regular lines, and can only be assigned to Secondary Line holder if specifically requested.
Disputed Pairings for April 2020
Hong Kong
#15, #30, #34, #76
Anchorage
#8, #12, #29, #41, #51, #89
Memphis MD-11
#3006
#3008
Los Angeles MD-11
#2007
777
Disputed pairings: #7, #13, #17, #28, #39, #43, #45, #47, #57, #66, #67, #76, #77 5/2, #88, #108, #114, #118, #176, #179, #228, #229, #233, #234, #236, #252, #263, #264, #284, #300, #304, #305, #310, #317, #326, #328, #331, #336, #360, #385
SGN LOOP ALERT
HKG Pilots should be aware that trips like HKG TRIP 67 (revised) on 17FEB20, which includes operating CAN-SGN-CGK-SIN are concerning to the Association. While we appreciate the enormous strain that the coronavirus has placed on the entire FedEx system, including our pilots, this pairing does not meet the safety standards that the Association believes must exist for your protection. We reached that conclusion after an analysis by our subject matter experts. We attempted to resolve this matter with the Company without success. We urge you to exercise great caution if you are assigned this pairing.
Concerning safe operation, particularly in times of increased stress and strain operating under many pressures brought by the coronavirus on our system and us as individuals, please keep in mind that there is no such thing as a wrong time or place to make a necessary safety-based decision concerning your ability to fly. Don't hesitate to use the IMSAFE checklist to evaluate your situation on a continual basis.
03-05-2020, 08:17 PM
#5
Not a real airline pilot
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2016
Position: Cargo > Pax
Posts: 365
Originally Posted by Noworkallplay
Some are traditional disputes and some are not. Read letter below sent out tonight.This afternoon, MEC Chairman Pete Harmon met with VP of Flight Operations Tim Leonard to discuss the use of the Premium Plaza Lounge in TPE. This meeting followed our CBA negotiated dispute process for hotels in section 5.B.4.b.ii. Unfortunately, this process does not lend itself to an immediate resolution. Having considered the information discussed during the meeting, we remain firm in our stance that this facility is substandard per the CBA and ought to be immediately discontinued.
We believe Covid-19 created the need for creative scheduling. Instead of revising our system form, the Company placed the burden on the backs of the pilots. In response to the virus, Taiwan instituted restrictions on entry for those who have been in Hong Kong, Macau, or China in the previous 14 days. This applies to many of our FedEx bid pack trips in the MD-11, HKG-767, and 777. The Company began using the Plaza Lounge inside of the immigration area of the terminal to bypass the restriction against processing through immigration.
The Plaza Lounge has single rooms and double rooms. The single rooms do not have an en-suite bathroom. The double rooms do. Initially, the Company did not ensure that pilots were booked in a double room. That situation has been rectified as now the Company essentially reserved all of the rooms in the Plaza Lounge; meaning with very few exceptions only FedEx pilots will be staying in these rooms in the weeks ahead. Nonetheless, many problems still exist with this facility.
We know it is frustrating to read communications from Company leadership about how you should rest, eat well, exercise and avoid crowds as a way to avoid illness. This simply doesn't recognize the reality of the lives of FedEx pilots working through these difficult conditions. We presented the issues that you provided to us through the PDR system. Most concerning is the fatigue factor caused by noise from multiple sources that interrupt your sleep. We are also concerned about the lack of an exercise facility, reliance on buffet-style eating, and the inability to go anywhere outside of the lounge other than a terminal full of passengers. It is clear from your PDRs that the use of this lounge is having a significant negative impact on the overall safe operation.
While Management assures us they are continuing to seek a means for our pilots to enter Taiwan, they have taken steps to mitigate issues associated with the Plaza Lounge. However, these mitigation efforts have been limited to matters within the facility. At the end of the day, the Plaza Lounge remains the Plaza Lounge – a short term respite for airline passengers who are not in the business of piloting airplanes throughout Asia or around the world. It can never be a proper layover hotel for FedEx pilots.
We believe that changes to the schedule are the only answer as the Plaza Lounge will never be the type of facility that we require to operate safely. We realize that these are unique circumstances, but that is exactly why changes to the schedule must occur. Management has repeatedly thanked you for going above and beyond to get FedEx through this crisis. They need to do the same for you. No effort should be spared to ensure your ability to operate safely.
Without management being willing to change the system, this lounge is integral to every pairing that lays over in TPE. To that end, ALPA has disputed pairings which include TPE layovers. The dispute process is not a solution and will have uneven results. The number of trips disputed may exceed the number of disputes that can be withheld from the bid pack. Please read our previous communication that contains an example explanation of the traditional dispute process. Your PDRs were the ultimate drivers for the issues we raised with the Company. We are determined to continue the dispute of this facility along with any other facility we deem inappropriate. The bottom line is that safety, as defined by the line pilots, must be served.
APRIL 2020 DISPUTED PAIRINGS
Traditional Disputed Pairings
There are two tracks for disputes: System Chief Pilot and Fatigue Risk Management Group Tracks. Please refer to the CBA 25.BB.E for clarification of both tracks. The following pairings are disputed under the System Chief Pilot Track. Within CBA restrictions, disputed pairings on the SCP track are not placed on regular lines, and can only be assigned to Secondary Line holder if specifically requested.
Disputed Pairings for April 2020
Hong Kong
#15, #30, #34, #76
Anchorage
#8, #12, #29, #41, #51, #89
Memphis MD-11
#3006
#3008
Los Angeles MD-11
#2007
777
Disputed pairings: #7, #13, #17, #28, #39, #43, #45, #47, #57, #66, #67, #76, #77 5/2, #88, #108, #114, #118, #176, #179, #228, #229, #233, #234, #236, #252, #263, #264, #284, #300, #304, #305, #310, #317, #326, #328, #331, #336, #360, #385
SGN LOOP ALERT
HKG Pilots should be aware that trips like HKG TRIP 67 (revised) on 17FEB20, which includes operating CAN-SGN-CGK-SIN are concerning to the Association. While we appreciate the enormous strain that the coronavirus has placed on the entire FedEx system, including our pilots, this pairing does not meet the safety standards that the Association believes must exist for your protection. We reached that conclusion after an analysis by our subject matter experts. We attempted to resolve this matter with the Company without success. We urge you to exercise great caution if you are assigned this pairing.
Concerning safe operation, particularly in times of increased stress and strain operating under many pressures brought by the coronavirus on our system and us as individuals, please keep in mind that there is no such thing as a wrong time or place to make a necessary safety-based decision concerning your ability to fly. Don't hesitate to use the IMSAFE checklist to evaluate your situation on a continual basis.
We believe Covid-19 created the need for creative scheduling. Instead of revising our system form, the Company placed the burden on the backs of the pilots. In response to the virus, Taiwan instituted restrictions on entry for those who have been in Hong Kong, Macau, or China in the previous 14 days. This applies to many of our FedEx bid pack trips in the MD-11, HKG-767, and 777. The Company began using the Plaza Lounge inside of the immigration area of the terminal to bypass the restriction against processing through immigration.
The Plaza Lounge has single rooms and double rooms. The single rooms do not have an en-suite bathroom. The double rooms do. Initially, the Company did not ensure that pilots were booked in a double room. That situation has been rectified as now the Company essentially reserved all of the rooms in the Plaza Lounge; meaning with very few exceptions only FedEx pilots will be staying in these rooms in the weeks ahead. Nonetheless, many problems still exist with this facility.
We know it is frustrating to read communications from Company leadership about how you should rest, eat well, exercise and avoid crowds as a way to avoid illness. This simply doesn't recognize the reality of the lives of FedEx pilots working through these difficult conditions. We presented the issues that you provided to us through the PDR system. Most concerning is the fatigue factor caused by noise from multiple sources that interrupt your sleep. We are also concerned about the lack of an exercise facility, reliance on buffet-style eating, and the inability to go anywhere outside of the lounge other than a terminal full of passengers. It is clear from your PDRs that the use of this lounge is having a significant negative impact on the overall safe operation.
While Management assures us they are continuing to seek a means for our pilots to enter Taiwan, they have taken steps to mitigate issues associated with the Plaza Lounge. However, these mitigation efforts have been limited to matters within the facility. At the end of the day, the Plaza Lounge remains the Plaza Lounge – a short term respite for airline passengers who are not in the business of piloting airplanes throughout Asia or around the world. It can never be a proper layover hotel for FedEx pilots.
We believe that changes to the schedule are the only answer as the Plaza Lounge will never be the type of facility that we require to operate safely. We realize that these are unique circumstances, but that is exactly why changes to the schedule must occur. Management has repeatedly thanked you for going above and beyond to get FedEx through this crisis. They need to do the same for you. No effort should be spared to ensure your ability to operate safely.
Without management being willing to change the system, this lounge is integral to every pairing that lays over in TPE. To that end, ALPA has disputed pairings which include TPE layovers. The dispute process is not a solution and will have uneven results. The number of trips disputed may exceed the number of disputes that can be withheld from the bid pack. Please read our previous communication that contains an example explanation of the traditional dispute process. Your PDRs were the ultimate drivers for the issues we raised with the Company. We are determined to continue the dispute of this facility along with any other facility we deem inappropriate. The bottom line is that safety, as defined by the line pilots, must be served.
APRIL 2020 DISPUTED PAIRINGS
Traditional Disputed Pairings
There are two tracks for disputes: System Chief Pilot and Fatigue Risk Management Group Tracks. Please refer to the CBA 25.BB.E for clarification of both tracks. The following pairings are disputed under the System Chief Pilot Track. Within CBA restrictions, disputed pairings on the SCP track are not placed on regular lines, and can only be assigned to Secondary Line holder if specifically requested.
Disputed Pairings for April 2020
Hong Kong
#15, #30, #34, #76
Anchorage
#8, #12, #29, #41, #51, #89
Memphis MD-11
#3006
#3008
Los Angeles MD-11
#2007
777
Disputed pairings: #7, #13, #17, #28, #39, #43, #45, #47, #57, #66, #67, #76, #77 5/2, #88, #108, #114, #118, #176, #179, #228, #229, #233, #234, #236, #252, #263, #264, #284, #300, #304, #305, #310, #317, #326, #328, #331, #336, #360, #385
SGN LOOP ALERT
HKG Pilots should be aware that trips like HKG TRIP 67 (revised) on 17FEB20, which includes operating CAN-SGN-CGK-SIN are concerning to the Association. While we appreciate the enormous strain that the coronavirus has placed on the entire FedEx system, including our pilots, this pairing does not meet the safety standards that the Association believes must exist for your protection. We reached that conclusion after an analysis by our subject matter experts. We attempted to resolve this matter with the Company without success. We urge you to exercise great caution if you are assigned this pairing.
Concerning safe operation, particularly in times of increased stress and strain operating under many pressures brought by the coronavirus on our system and us as individuals, please keep in mind that there is no such thing as a wrong time or place to make a necessary safety-based decision concerning your ability to fly. Don't hesitate to use the IMSAFE checklist to evaluate your situation on a continual basis.
Thanks. I just saw that email come in.
03-05-2020, 09:24 PM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MD11 FO
Posts: 1,109
Originally Posted by DirtyPurple
Thanks. I just saw that email come in.
03-06-2020, 05:57 AM
#7
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2018
Posts: 1,838
Originally Posted by Tuck
So why exactly are we disputing the TPE plaza lounge pairings and not the ICN transit lodge pairings? Makes no sense to me to dispute one and not the other??
Once again you always have a one up arm chair quarterback comment to make. STEP UP! Stop being just a mouth piece. We need to do the IMSAFE check with the ICN lounge also. Shouldn't need our hands held to understand its our job to operate safely. Be big boys/girls.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
