What Am I Missing Here?
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,201
Likes: 32
From: 4A2FU
New contract language is not added unless someone wants to try something different.
Under the current CBA, a pilot ON RESERVE can not be assigned a trip that extends more than two hours into their day off - Base Hotel Standby or not. I'll take my own personal, first-hand experience on that over someone else's opinion. When the company tried that on me, I stood up for myself, defended the contract, and they backed down quicker than ALPA could answer the DART. With this new addition, the company will feel emboldened to press-to-test that again.
Now, I am telling you all that having the word "assigned" and "base hotel standby" combined with the current, stand alone operational extension language, all together in a single, additional paragraph in this TA is a really freaking bad idea.
But hell, don't take my word for it. Go ahead and vote 'yes" and find out for yourself.
Under the current CBA, a pilot ON RESERVE can not be assigned a trip that extends more than two hours into their day off - Base Hotel Standby or not. I'll take my own personal, first-hand experience on that over someone else's opinion. When the company tried that on me, I stood up for myself, defended the contract, and they backed down quicker than ALPA could answer the DART. With this new addition, the company will feel emboldened to press-to-test that again.
Now, I am telling you all that having the word "assigned" and "base hotel standby" combined with the current, stand alone operational extension language, all together in a single, additional paragraph in this TA is a really freaking bad idea.
But hell, don't take my word for it. Go ahead and vote 'yes" and find out for yourself.
#12
Line Holder
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,481
Likes: 23
From: Crewmember
At the very least, this should be clarified and made crystal clear, before we lose the grievance over it.
Another reason to vote no.
#13
New contract language is not added unless someone wants to try something different.
Under the current CBA, a pilot ON RESERVE can not be assigned a trip that extends more than two hours into their day off - Base Hotel Standby or not. I'll take my own personal, first-hand experience on that over someone else's opinion. When the company tried that on me, I stood up for myself, defended the contract, and they backed down quicker than ALPA could answer the DART. With this new addition, the company will feel emboldened to press-to-test that again.
Now, I am telling you all that having the words "assigned" and "base hotel standby" combined with the current, stand alone operational extension language, all together in a single, additional paragraph in this TA is a really freaking bad idea.
But hell, don't take my word for it. Go ahead and vote 'yes" and find out for yourself.
Under the current CBA, a pilot ON RESERVE can not be assigned a trip that extends more than two hours into their day off - Base Hotel Standby or not. I'll take my own personal, first-hand experience on that over someone else's opinion. When the company tried that on me, I stood up for myself, defended the contract, and they backed down quicker than ALPA could answer the DART. With this new addition, the company will feel emboldened to press-to-test that again.
Now, I am telling you all that having the words "assigned" and "base hotel standby" combined with the current, stand alone operational extension language, all together in a single, additional paragraph in this TA is a really freaking bad idea.
But hell, don't take my word for it. Go ahead and vote 'yes" and find out for yourself.
Assigned Hotel Stby
Awarded new R16 Lines
Bidding LCA Lines
Selling Back Vacation then Not working
Building a retirement under the MBCB Plan
…Or remotely worried any reduction in total pilots needed will affect them
They are concerned about $$, not QOL, and are confident their current relative seniority can protect them from the concessions
They will be unaffected by any of the givebacks
They are retiring within 3-5 years and are using the TVM argument to mask a much, much bigger concern of their cohort.
NO voters understand the company wants a deal because they saw a 99% strike vote, and an opportunity to gain tactical advantage on UPS going into peak.
All leverage that will still exist after a NO vote.
ReGroup. ReSurvey. ReFocus. ReNegotiate.
DAL, SWA, and UAL have all done it successfully. It can be done here as well.
The company looks past the NC and MEC - straight at the pilots - what will they see this time?
How will that picture affect the future?
Vote wisely!
In Transparency, Integrity and Unity (for Everyome),
DLax
Last edited by DLax85; 07-07-2023 at 09:15 PM.
#14
On Reserve
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
From: Fedex
[QUOTE=Stan446;3661179][QUOTE=
If you are coming to this forum for a clear answer other than, " the company is going to screw you", you are in the wrong place. No one here is going to tell you anything accurate or positive. [/QUOTE]
Stan446, why do you keep posting here daily ad nauseam then? Do you have nothing else to do????????
If you are coming to this forum for a clear answer other than, " the company is going to screw you", you are in the wrong place. No one here is going to tell you anything accurate or positive. [/QUOTE]
Stan446, why do you keep posting here daily ad nauseam then? Do you have nothing else to do????????
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
From: Fetal in the hub
Untrue, which was the point of this change. Not saying this is going to sway anyone, but in the interest of accuracy it's probably worth mentioning. It really bothers me when people start making stuff into a problem when it's not. Under the current CBA, say a pilot had base hotel standby from Monday to Friday. He gets launched Wednesday on a trip that goes to Monday. Yes - that is completely possible/legal and happened multiple times to pilots during Covid when the entire HKG bid pack was published as base hotel standby. He is not viewed as "launched" on a trip by the current CBA calculations until the assigned trip shows on Wed. The standby duty on Mon and Tues has no bearing on the situation. There is no overage for the extra days Sat to Mon. Those are paid at straight time. There is no standard overage (150%/200%) until a SECOND trip extension after the first extension that ends Monday. This change in the TA honors the first trip extension with the same limits as any other domestic or international trip and ensures overage is paid for the first extension.
4.BB.8.b "b. If a reserve trip extends more than 2 hours into time scheduled free from duty at base on a non R-day, overage CH shall be computed as trip rig for the period from scheduled trip termination until actual trip termination. Overage CH shall be applied as follows:
- i. CH accrued on an R-day shall be applied toward leveling and credited toward RLG at 100%.
- ii. CH accrued on time scheduled free from duty on a non R-day shall be applied toward leveling only at 100% and shall be compensated in addition to BLG/RLG at 150% of the pilot’s normal pay rate."
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
From: Fetal in the hub
New contract language is not added unless someone wants to try something different.
Under the current CBA, a pilot ON RESERVE can not be assigned a trip that extends more than two hours into their day off - Base Hotel Standby or not. I'll take my own personal, first-hand experience on that over someone else's opinion. When the company tried that on me, I stood up for myself, defended the contract, and they backed down quicker than ALPA could answer the DART. With this new addition, the company will feel emboldened to press-to-test that again.
Now, I am telling you all that having the words "assigned" and "base hotel standby" combined with the current, stand alone operational extension language, all together in a single, additional paragraph in this TA is a really freaking bad idea.
But hell, don't take my word for it. Go ahead and vote 'yes" and find out for yourself.
Under the current CBA, a pilot ON RESERVE can not be assigned a trip that extends more than two hours into their day off - Base Hotel Standby or not. I'll take my own personal, first-hand experience on that over someone else's opinion. When the company tried that on me, I stood up for myself, defended the contract, and they backed down quicker than ALPA could answer the DART. With this new addition, the company will feel emboldened to press-to-test that again.
Now, I am telling you all that having the words "assigned" and "base hotel standby" combined with the current, stand alone operational extension language, all together in a single, additional paragraph in this TA is a really freaking bad idea.
But hell, don't take my word for it. Go ahead and vote 'yes" and find out for yourself.
#17
“They are concerned about $$, not QOL, and are confident their current relative seniority can protect them from the concessions”
There is no such thing as seniority anymore. You can walk out the door and be revised into something that is nothing at all what you were awarded with minimal repercussions to the company. We should be getting paid 200%, or at the very least 175% for the WHOLE trip if you are revised. The company uses the revision process as a scheduling tool and this should have been fixed with this TA! I know cause this has happened to me, and others multiple times.
JZ
There is no such thing as seniority anymore. You can walk out the door and be revised into something that is nothing at all what you were awarded with minimal repercussions to the company. We should be getting paid 200%, or at the very least 175% for the WHOLE trip if you are revised. The company uses the revision process as a scheduling tool and this should have been fixed with this TA! I know cause this has happened to me, and others multiple times.
JZ
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



