max8222

The biggest problem I see is the company thinks this is the new normal and that there is nothing wrong with it. Just like company Jumpseat’s. Big savings for them and no big deal. Funny how I do not have many company Jumpseat’s on my regular line and once I start the trip revisions out the ass with a lot of company JS. By the way you only get bank money for a Jumpseat if it was on your original pairing. Just got and insight response on that!

Tuck

I actually think, in the time of the pandemic, the Swiss is a great hotel. Gym open (can't get that at most hotels in the US), cafe open plus the hotel food is pretty darn good. Let's see it's very easy to make my $75/day (although it's usually more than that since so many "days" are spent airborne consuming catering) last with the all you can eat breakfast, a lunch snack and a full dinner - not sure who eats more than that? Oh yeah, add in a few beers as well - was just there and it's easily under $75. The lounge on the 10th floor? That's about the best I've seen in the system for now. Look, guys need to understand that the job has changed - as it has for most Americans. It won't last forever but it has changed during this time.

abides

tell me why ALPA would negotiate an increase in perdiem when they don’t get anything (dues) in return? Perdiem isn’t pensionable or taxable (in most cases). The company AND ALPA would
like to see perdiem stay low. That’s why.

Nightflyer

The union should be responsive to its members. They should do what the members want, not what is best for the ALPA bureaucrats at the national office. Per diem is TAX FREE. International pilots are losing at least $10,000 TAX FREE per year.

They always tell us it is "our" union. How can that be true, if we are treated like children by the people in charge? How can that be true, if they think they always "know better" than us? I remember when the Roth 401K first came out. I asked if it would be part of our contract. "My union" said, no, it wouldn't be a good deal for us. They made the decision for us, without asking us what we thought. A couple contracts went by before we finally got the Roth 401K. We could have gotten it a lot earlier, if ALPA leadership had decided we should have it. My point is, the leadership should listen to us, but they don't because they are, for all practical purposes, unaccountable to us.

The retirements scheme is a prime example. They need to do a 100% survey of the membership to see how much support it really has, then they need to publish the results, whether they like them or not. Remember the Enders report? The union is just as guilty about hiding stuff from the membership.

Per diem is an expense that the company can write off as a business expense. There is no reason for the company to be against it any more than normal pay increases. Would you rather have $10,000 tax free? or $10,000 that is taxed?

Adlerdriver

I agree there is company abuse regarding operational JS use during Covid. There is at least one grievance currently pending. Just to clarify your statement above: The MOU JS bank provision is applicable to bid pack trips only. An extra pairing would not get JS bank credit even if the JS was on that "original pairing".

HOWEVER - (my main reason for posting), if you are positioned back to base via company JS at the end of a trip, you must receive travel bank credit for the baseline fare for those JS flight sequences. This is required on every trip, no matter if the JS was originally there or not. This requirement is in Section 8 of the CBA and has nothing to do with the Covid MOU. That CBA provision does not involve the calculation of the baseline fare as an average between the current bid pack and the corresponding one from last year. You simply look up the fares (view fares in deviation & deadhead section) for the month and city-pair and take the highest fare listed.

I have routinely had to submit travel bank discrepancies to get these funds added to my travel bank or to correct the fare amount because it was not the highest listed. Just a head's up.

Adlerdriver

Someone else already pointed out that under normal conditions, it's really not that difficult to sustain oneself on $75 a day internationally. I've traveled worldwide, ate and drank what I wanted, never thought about trying to save my per diem and still managed to never spend it all. The times on duty, eating long-haul catering or the free breakfasts and/or happy hours at many locations reduce the requirement to find 3 square meals on the economy every day. If someone has to go to a serious sit-down restaurant for 3 meals a day, depending on where they are, that might strain the budget. Most guys I fly with don't operate like that. I sleep through the free breakfasts often because I value sleep more than free food. Then I go find something when I wake up. Paris, Singapore - sure, I might get close to $75 those days. But not all the time. Certainly being locked up during Covid with only room service is going to get expensive and we should be seeing some monetary relief for that in my opinion. But, under normal conditions, I don't want the union to spend negotiating capital to get me a few more tax-free dollars in-lieu of what I would consider better improvements. Here's why:


Per diem is meant to offset or hopefully completely cover expenses incurred while on company business. It's not meant to be an alternative source of tax-free income. It's meant to be spent. If we were provided exactly the right amount for every trip, we would have zero at the end of the trip. So, whether it's tax-free or not doesn't matter because it's all gone.


Having our union go to the negotiating table to claim we need full government rate per-diem only passes the common sense test if our pilots are consistently over-spending to sustain themselves. My experience internationally doesn't support that and while I can't speak for everyone, I would guess many share my view. Seeking more per diem because it's tax-free means it's being saved to use elsewhere as normal income. Why would the company agree to that when our own argument defeats the very reason we're asking for more. You ask for more because you need it - not because you're going to save it.


Increase my A-plan, B-plan, get better work rules so my pay per hour goes up not only from straight raises but because I'm working less for more money. Chasing more per diem is not where we need to be seeking improvements, IMO.

Adlerdriver

Re-reading this, I realize it doesn’t make my point as well as I hoped. Of course, tax-free would produce more buying power so that does matter. But it would still be gone, which was my main point.

Stan446

You are finding that FX guys are sadly no better than the dregs of society. Its the "American" mentality of non conformity.
Company put out at least 3 FCIFs about not leaving but that doesn't seem to apply to FX pilots. Everyone who breaks the rules has an excuse. Sad to see highly compensated professionals acting like kids and continually breaking the rules and leaving the hotel. Its not that hard to figure out where the hotel ends and public space starts. Sad to see I work with people who continually want to screw it up for others.

BusBoy88

Could you possibly complain any more ? I mean you must be one miserable person to fly with.

Rock

I’m going to guess the answer is yes to both.