Originally Posted by UnusualAttitude (Post 3625036)

More garbage in Section 24, the gift that keeps on giving. If a pilot is displaced (assigned) it is still considered a lateral move for the sake of a subsequent system bid. So even if you are put into a position via assignment you cannot bid back out of it via award (to a lateral position) until you have been activated for the adequate amount of time. The fact that ALPA ever agreed to this language is puzzling. The fact that we didn't even bother attempting to improve it during this negotiation is infuriating. Example: Pilot is excessed out of their 777CA seat and into the 767CA seat. There is another bid in 18 months, that pilot who was previously a 777CA and excessed cannot bid back to the 777CA seat but a pilot JR to him not subject to a bid award restriction can go right ahead. Seniority abrogation at it's finest.

Originally Posted by UnusualAttitude;[url=tel:3625036

3625036[/url]]More garbage in Section 24, the gift that keeps on giving. If a pilot is displaced (assigned) it is still considered a lateral move for the sake of a subsequent system bid. So even if you are put into a position via assignment you cannot bid back out of it via award (to a lateral position) until you have been activated for the adequate amount of time. The fact that ALPA ever agreed to this language is puzzling. The fact that we didn't even bother attempting to improve it during this negotiation is infuriating. Example: Pilot is excessed out of their 777CA seat and into the 767CA seat. There is another bid in 18 months, that pilot who was previously a 777CA and excessed cannot bid back to the 777CA seat but a pilot JR to him not subject to a bid award restriction can go right ahead. Seniority abrogation at it's finest.

Originally Posted by UnusualAttitude (Post 3625036)

More garbage in Section 24, the gift that keeps on giving. If a pilot is displaced (assigned) it is still considered a lateral move for the sake of a subsequent system bid. So even if you are put into a position via assignment you cannot bid back out of it via award (to a lateral position) until you have been activated for the adequate amount of time. The fact that ALPA ever agreed to this language is puzzling. The fact that we didn't even bother attempting to improve it during this negotiation is infuriating. Example: Pilot is excessed out of their 777CA seat and into the 767CA seat. There is another bid in 18 months, that pilot who was previously a 777CA and excessed cannot bid back to the 777CA seat but a pilot JR to him not subject to a bid award restriction can go right ahead. Seniority abrogation at it's finest.

Originally Posted by UnusualAttitude (Post 3625036)

More garbage in Section 24, the gift that keeps on giving. If a pilot is displaced (assigned) it is still considered a lateral move for the sake of a subsequent system bid. So even if you are put into a position via assignment you cannot bid back out of it via award (to a lateral position) until you have been activated for the adequate amount of time. The fact that ALPA ever agreed to this language is puzzling. The fact that we didn't even bother attempting to improve it during this negotiation is infuriating. Example: Pilot is excessed out of their 777CA seat and into the 767CA seat. There is another bid in 18 months, that pilot who was previously a 777CA and excessed cannot bid back to the 777CA seat but a pilot JR to him not subject to a bid award restriction can go right ahead. Seniority abrogation at it's finest.

Originally Posted by PurpleToolBox (Post 3625054)

Do you have a reference for this?

Originally Posted by UnusualAttitude (Post 3625070)

I asked the question specifically via dart.

This is the response from FDX ALPA Legal:

“If you are assigned TO a WB captain position from a WB captain position: Once there, and if activated, then a future System Bid occurs, you will need to be activated in the WB captain seat for 24 months in order to receive a lateral WB Captain crew position. The 24.F.1 restrictions don’t “look back” on how you got there, it just looks “forward.””

Originally Posted by oncewasgood (Post 3625190)

You are correct. He is crossing his wires and mixing two different scenarios in an attempt to muddy the conversation.

Originally Posted by pinseeker (Post 3625055)

This is not true. If you think it is, please post the specific contract section and language to support your claim.

Have you heard of Assignment Right of Return? It's in the contract.