PolicyWonk

Some words have been deleted from the Substitution section.

It might have no impact, but it could. To know for sure that this isn't a degradation, tighter language needs to be used.

Page 370 G.3.H.3.c

Subsequent Availability Periods for SUB greater than 24 hours.

I'll put parentheses around the omitted words.

If the pilot chooses to remain eligible for substitution (by so indicating in VIPS) his subsequent availability periods are as follows:

I can see that it needed to be modified. If, instead of deleting the phrase, they'd included the option of communicating verbally with a scheduler, then it would be okay. In that case, the screen must remain as an option.

But the current page in VIPS for RAT and SUB for SUB greater than 72 TAFB is not programmed correctly.

This language allows what could be a useful page, if it were programmed correctly, to disappear.

If it disappears, the ability to take a photo of the page as a basis for a grievance disappears and you then rely on conversations that might, or might not, be available to you. Even though they were recorded.

An accurate screen is a necessity in understanding the matrix, especially in the longer SUB windows. We can't have language that allows that screen to disappear.

I expected language that would improve SUB, but this is a potential degradation if it is exploited.

CloudSailor

Unfortunately, there are several areas in the TA, that have added unclear language to the CBA, which could be exploited by the company. 6 week bid period, Secondary Line Replacement (PBS), lay-flat seat to highest fare... Several of these have been addressed in the Q&A and videos, but not in a side letter that goes with the TA. Since we are voting on the TA and its language, not the Q&A and videos, I only took into account the language in the TA as binding, nothing else.

Busboy

More accurately... "will be exploited by the company"...

kronan

Can't believe I'm responding to policywonk

But I don't think it means what you think it means, simply means that you've chosen to remain eligible for SUB if you don't elect OTP for the remainder of your long sub window

PolicyWonk

Check out the inaccurate programming if you decline a RAT in a long SUB window. Again, based on memory. I don't have SUB memorized.

The programming needs to be fixed, not potentially disappear as a result of agreeing to poorly chosen words. The screen could be a real help if it were accurate.

An attempt was made to get it fixed.

Viper446

You aren't one of those kids that work at the desk in the Mem hub, are you?

Oh, and ref pg, 32, sec 7, article 8 sub para 11, e. 5

ancreserve

Here is the 6 week letter: https://fdx.alpa.org/LinkClick.aspx?...%3d&tabid=9806

Raptor

Since lie flat overrides any other nomenclature, and since we will be getting business seats while retaining bank for the first class seat, why don't I see a nice clarification letter on that?

USMCFDX

Easily could have added "the company commits to 12 bid periods in a year".

Adlerdriver

Maybe I'm looking at this wrong, but I don't get the logic here. My bank is going to be reflect the cost of a first class seat, but I get business class because it lays flat. Why don't they just buy the FC seat if I get the $$ in my bank anyway?

I have a week old question still pending with the union along these lines too. Still waiting for an answer:

If I'm on a DH with over 16 hours of duty, the TA still says what the current contract say. It's supposed to be in first class (discounted then full-fare, then business) and one leg.

Does that still apply on a 3-class cabin aircraft with lay flat seating in business class?

or - does this excerpt from the TA trump that requirement:
"Regardless of a passenger carrier's nomenclature or hierarchy for classes of service, a Flat Bed Seat satisfies the higher class of service requirements set forth in this Section."