TA = Backdoor PBS? You Decide…
10-04-2015, 02:07 AM
#1
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Posts: 26
TA = Backdoor PBS? You Decide…
We all know the company wants PBS so bad they are willing to throw huge pay raises our way in order to gain those desired efficiencies. We all know those gains in scheduling efficiency and productivity will come at the expense of our QOL. I’m fairly certain that 95% of the crew force believes this, as evidenced by the overwhelming No vote, against PBS.
What I see in this TA is deftly crafted language to get PBS like scheduling efficiencies into our flying program. Its not that readily apparent if you just look at one section… but, when you start connecting the dots you begin to see a picture forming…
Section 25.S.2.e/d/f Disruptions. (From Block 6 Rep)
· Section 25.S.2.e.
You walk into AOC expecting to fly an easy GSO pm out and back. You’re senior, and you’re looking forward to a white box of catering, a quick nap in a hotel, and an early arrival back into MEM. Scheduling calls, and they need you to fly to CPR-BOI instead. You say, “But I didn’t bid CPR-BOI? I’m senior!” They say, “Enjoy your flight, you’ve been revised.” Management has been practicing this type of revision in the recent past. Now this Out and Back Disruption is institutionalized in the TA for 1.5 CH.
Section 25.S.2.d.
You are scheduled to be bumped for training on an augmented flight. You are looking forward to some time off at home with pay. Unfortunately, your RFO is unable to operate the trip. Now your phone is ringing, and it’s CRS calling you instead of a reserve pilot. Welcome to Crew Designation Disruption. Without any options, you now get to work the trip as an RF2 or RFO for 1.5 CH per flight.
Section 25.S.2.f.
You have packed your swimsuit and plan to spend your layover in the sun in FLL. Next thing you know, you are wishing you had packed your parka for YEG. What happened? Single Layover Disruption happened. The company needs a pilot up north, and for 3 CH you get to pay the price for not getting to fly south where your seniority is.
The addition of these Section 25 provisions codifies these “Trip Revisions” and removes the possibility of SUB with OTP options in these instances. CRS can now revise your trip using concrete language in the TA. The added CH penalty is nice, however, these revisions abrogate seniority; at their best they pay equal to or less than draft, and they give the pilots no options.
She is absolutely right! This TA has now codified trip revisions and given the company carte blanche to change your schedule WITHOUT YOUR INPUT OR APPROVAL.
Let me also quote from the letter entitled, “the give-backs”:
Beginning with Section 25, there are three new additions to section 25.S.2, which are paragraphs d, e, and f. These sections codify what the NC has stated that the company could do all along. But what they failed to point out are the nuances of substitution in our current CBA, in which the savvy pilot could either accept the new trip, or opt out for open time priority (OTP) at 125% of pairing CH. With these new additions to Section 25, these options could be removed, and the revision disruption pay would in many instances fall short of 125%.
In addition to these obvious give-backs, we must all give thanks to vc931, Raptor, Busdriver12 and CloudSailor for discussing this truly insidious backdoor PBS move by the company. Section 25.F.3.
3. A pilot’s current bid period schedule, inclusive of carryover R-days into the subsequent bid period, shall take precedence over a subsequent bid period award, except as follows…
Add this together with Section 25.A.4 (80% of all know reserve days, by crew position, shall be built into reserve lines published in the bid period package...Remaining reserve days will be made available as reserve blocks, in the View/Add Window, Secondary Working Window (SWW) and beyond.)
What we have now is reserve carry over that conflicts only under
very specific circumstances in the secondary window (Section
25.F.3-8). Consider the effect of an additional 20% of reserve
lines, and Raptor hits it on the nose!
(Raptor)
Plus, all that newly conflicted stuff will go into the secondary lines.
I predict that not only will the percentage of secondary lines grow to replace the 20% of reserve lines being put into it, the number of secondary lines will grow to include all of this. And, there is no language in the TA to keep the number of reserve lines we currently have, except we have to have 13% of R24. What stops the company from making secondary lines comprise 30-40% of the bid pack on their newly efficient PBS engine?
Sorry Raptor, but I think we all need to chew on this bone a bit more… You further go on to say:
My inner company planner comes out in "how am I going to maximize this" for the company's benefit. What I would do:
1) make every reserve line a carryover
2) in every secondary line that has reserve, make it carryover too
3) most all the reserve lines in normal bidpack no longer need to cover first week
4) minimize all the "normal" reserve lines so I can force more people into secondary lines (more lines in PBS is better for company)
I would do this because of one change in the TA...the one where reserve carryover kills the next month's trips instead of having the reserve dropped. This would put a lot of lines having trips or reserve dropped. Thus, number of secondary lines could be increased.
Take number of secondary lines as a percentage today. Add the 20% of reserve lines to that number (from the TA change), add to secondary the number of reserve lines you cut while making reserve lines minimal, add to the secondary lines all these trips dropped by doing what I suggested above and you have tremendous growth in secondary lines. Just by tweaking how I think as the company, I can probably double the number of secondary lines over what I have today. Welcome to a split crew force. The 50% bidding regular lines, the 10% bidding reserve, and the 40% in PBS.
Wait. I thought we held firm and stopped the company from instituting PBS?
The real problem here is that your logic is sound. This is a tremendous win for the company. On the one hand I have to hand it to their negotiators for such craftiness…
On the other hand, does anyone not think the company will not attempt to exploit this to the max extent possible?
In this TA we see in Section 25 alone, the company now has achieved scheduling flexibility gains that only fall short of a complete PBS system in percent implementation and name; trips can be changed and revised without 125% compensation, and the secondary line system is going to grow—to what degree who knows?
If you voted no to PBS, ask yourself, Are the dollars and enhancements this TA provides worth voting yes to and opening the door to PBS? Is it worth the certain give-away in our QOL?
Think carefully, because once we crack open the lid on this Pandora’s Box there’s no going back….
What I see in this TA is deftly crafted language to get PBS like scheduling efficiencies into our flying program. Its not that readily apparent if you just look at one section… but, when you start connecting the dots you begin to see a picture forming…
Section 25.S.2.e/d/f Disruptions. (From Block 6 Rep)
· Section 25.S.2.e.
You walk into AOC expecting to fly an easy GSO pm out and back. You’re senior, and you’re looking forward to a white box of catering, a quick nap in a hotel, and an early arrival back into MEM. Scheduling calls, and they need you to fly to CPR-BOI instead. You say, “But I didn’t bid CPR-BOI? I’m senior!” They say, “Enjoy your flight, you’ve been revised.” Management has been practicing this type of revision in the recent past. Now this Out and Back Disruption is institutionalized in the TA for 1.5 CH.
Section 25.S.2.d.
You are scheduled to be bumped for training on an augmented flight. You are looking forward to some time off at home with pay. Unfortunately, your RFO is unable to operate the trip. Now your phone is ringing, and it’s CRS calling you instead of a reserve pilot. Welcome to Crew Designation Disruption. Without any options, you now get to work the trip as an RF2 or RFO for 1.5 CH per flight.
Section 25.S.2.f.
You have packed your swimsuit and plan to spend your layover in the sun in FLL. Next thing you know, you are wishing you had packed your parka for YEG. What happened? Single Layover Disruption happened. The company needs a pilot up north, and for 3 CH you get to pay the price for not getting to fly south where your seniority is.
The addition of these Section 25 provisions codifies these “Trip Revisions” and removes the possibility of SUB with OTP options in these instances. CRS can now revise your trip using concrete language in the TA. The added CH penalty is nice, however, these revisions abrogate seniority; at their best they pay equal to or less than draft, and they give the pilots no options.
She is absolutely right! This TA has now codified trip revisions and given the company carte blanche to change your schedule WITHOUT YOUR INPUT OR APPROVAL.
Let me also quote from the letter entitled, “the give-backs”:
Beginning with Section 25, there are three new additions to section 25.S.2, which are paragraphs d, e, and f. These sections codify what the NC has stated that the company could do all along. But what they failed to point out are the nuances of substitution in our current CBA, in which the savvy pilot could either accept the new trip, or opt out for open time priority (OTP) at 125% of pairing CH. With these new additions to Section 25, these options could be removed, and the revision disruption pay would in many instances fall short of 125%.
In addition to these obvious give-backs, we must all give thanks to vc931, Raptor, Busdriver12 and CloudSailor for discussing this truly insidious backdoor PBS move by the company. Section 25.F.3.
3. A pilot’s current bid period schedule, inclusive of carryover R-days into the subsequent bid period, shall take precedence over a subsequent bid period award, except as follows…
Add this together with Section 25.A.4 (80% of all know reserve days, by crew position, shall be built into reserve lines published in the bid period package...Remaining reserve days will be made available as reserve blocks, in the View/Add Window, Secondary Working Window (SWW) and beyond.)
What we have now is reserve carry over that conflicts only under
very specific circumstances in the secondary window (Section
25.F.3-8). Consider the effect of an additional 20% of reserve
lines, and Raptor hits it on the nose!
(Raptor)
Plus, all that newly conflicted stuff will go into the secondary lines.
I predict that not only will the percentage of secondary lines grow to replace the 20% of reserve lines being put into it, the number of secondary lines will grow to include all of this. And, there is no language in the TA to keep the number of reserve lines we currently have, except we have to have 13% of R24. What stops the company from making secondary lines comprise 30-40% of the bid pack on their newly efficient PBS engine?
Sorry Raptor, but I think we all need to chew on this bone a bit more… You further go on to say:
My inner company planner comes out in "how am I going to maximize this" for the company's benefit. What I would do:
1) make every reserve line a carryover
2) in every secondary line that has reserve, make it carryover too
3) most all the reserve lines in normal bidpack no longer need to cover first week
4) minimize all the "normal" reserve lines so I can force more people into secondary lines (more lines in PBS is better for company)
I would do this because of one change in the TA...the one where reserve carryover kills the next month's trips instead of having the reserve dropped. This would put a lot of lines having trips or reserve dropped. Thus, number of secondary lines could be increased.
Take number of secondary lines as a percentage today. Add the 20% of reserve lines to that number (from the TA change), add to secondary the number of reserve lines you cut while making reserve lines minimal, add to the secondary lines all these trips dropped by doing what I suggested above and you have tremendous growth in secondary lines. Just by tweaking how I think as the company, I can probably double the number of secondary lines over what I have today. Welcome to a split crew force. The 50% bidding regular lines, the 10% bidding reserve, and the 40% in PBS.
Wait. I thought we held firm and stopped the company from instituting PBS?
The real problem here is that your logic is sound. This is a tremendous win for the company. On the one hand I have to hand it to their negotiators for such craftiness…
On the other hand, does anyone not think the company will not attempt to exploit this to the max extent possible?
In this TA we see in Section 25 alone, the company now has achieved scheduling flexibility gains that only fall short of a complete PBS system in percent implementation and name; trips can be changed and revised without 125% compensation, and the secondary line system is going to grow—to what degree who knows?
If you voted no to PBS, ask yourself, Are the dollars and enhancements this TA provides worth voting yes to and opening the door to PBS? Is it worth the certain give-away in our QOL?
Think carefully, because once we crack open the lid on this Pandora’s Box there’s no going back….
10-04-2015, 03:37 AM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2014
Position: MD
Posts: 194
Solid, comprehensive review.
If you think you're at the mercy of CRS now, just wait. It's a tangled web of deceit and our NC/MEC signed off on it.
Huge pay raises to sell PBS?
Well, not so much. A COLA is not a pay raise. It's an adjustment at best.
If you think you're at the mercy of CRS now, just wait. It's a tangled web of deceit and our NC/MEC signed off on it.
Huge pay raises to sell PBS?
Well, not so much. A COLA is not a pay raise. It's an adjustment at best.
10-04-2015, 05:09 AM
#3
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MD11 Capt
Posts: 41
Originally Posted by GetRealDude
Solid, comprehensive review.
If you think you're at the mercy of CRS now, just wait. It's a tangled web of deceit and our NC/MEC signed off on it.
Huge pay raises to sell PBS?
Well, not so much. A COLA is not a pay raise. It's an adjustment at best.
If you think you're at the mercy of CRS now, just wait. It's a tangled web of deceit and our NC/MEC signed off on it.
Huge pay raises to sell PBS?
Well, not so much. A COLA is not a pay raise. It's an adjustment at best.
10-04-2015, 05:46 AM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,052
Originally Posted by supercruiser
...Maybe thereafter we could get a contract of some type...
What happened to "our line in the sand" with PBS??? It was crossed, plain and simple, with the expansion of PBS already on property, via the SLR. Meanwhile we regard the company's lines in the sand as sacred.
10-04-2015, 05:46 AM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,052
Originally Posted by HercMasterJ
We all know the company wants PBS so bad they are willing to throw huge pay raises our way in order to gain those desired efficiencies. We all know those gains in scheduling efficiency and productivity will come at the expense of our QOL. I’m fairly certain that 95% of the crew force believes this, as evidenced by the overwhelming No vote, against PBS.
What I see in this TA is deftly crafted language to get PBS like scheduling efficiencies into our flying program. Its not that readily apparent if you just look at one section… but, when you start connecting the dots you begin to see a picture forming…
Section 25.S.2.e/d/f Disruptions. (From Block 6 Rep)
· Section 25.S.2.e.
You walk into AOC expecting to fly an easy GSO pm out and back. You’re senior, and you’re looking forward to a white box of catering, a quick nap in a hotel, and an early arrival back into MEM. Scheduling calls, and they need you to fly to CPR-BOI instead. You say, “But I didn’t bid CPR-BOI? I’m senior!” They say, “Enjoy your flight, you’ve been revised.” Management has been practicing this type of revision in the recent past. Now this Out and Back Disruption is institutionalized in the TA for 1.5 CH.
Section 25.S.2.d.
You are scheduled to be bumped for training on an augmented flight. You are looking forward to some time off at home with pay. Unfortunately, your RFO is unable to operate the trip. Now your phone is ringing, and it’s CRS calling you instead of a reserve pilot. Welcome to Crew Designation Disruption. Without any options, you now get to work the trip as an RF2 or RFO for 1.5 CH per flight.
Section 25.S.2.f.
You have packed your swimsuit and plan to spend your layover in the sun in FLL. Next thing you know, you are wishing you had packed your parka for YEG. What happened? Single Layover Disruption happened. The company needs a pilot up north, and for 3 CH you get to pay the price for not getting to fly south where your seniority is.
The addition of these Section 25 provisions codifies these “Trip Revisions” and removes the possibility of SUB with OTP options in these instances. CRS can now revise your trip using concrete language in the TA. The added CH penalty is nice, however, these revisions abrogate seniority; at their best they pay equal to or less than draft, and they give the pilots no options.
She is absolutely right! This TA has now codified trip revisions and given the company carte blanche to change your schedule WITHOUT YOUR INPUT OR APPROVAL.
Let me also quote from the letter entitled, “the give-backs”:
Beginning with Section 25, there are three new additions to section 25.S.2, which are paragraphs d, e, and f. These sections codify what the NC has stated that the company could do all along. But what they failed to point out are the nuances of substitution in our current CBA, in which the savvy pilot could either accept the new trip, or opt out for open time priority (OTP) at 125% of pairing CH. With these new additions to Section 25, these options could be removed, and the revision disruption pay would in many instances fall short of 125%.
In addition to these obvious give-backs, we must all give thanks to vc931, Raptor, Busdriver12 and CloudSailor for discussing this truly insidious backdoor PBS move by the company. Section 25.F.3.
3. A pilot’s current bid period schedule, inclusive of carryover R-days into the subsequent bid period, shall take precedence over a subsequent bid period award, except as follows…
Add this together with Section 25.A.4 (80% of all know reserve days, by crew position, shall be built into reserve lines published in the bid period package...Remaining reserve days will be made available as reserve blocks, in the View/Add Window, Secondary Working Window (SWW) and beyond.)
What we have now is reserve carry over that conflicts only under
very specific circumstances in the secondary window (Section
25.F.3-8). Consider the effect of an additional 20% of reserve
lines, and Raptor hits it on the nose!
(Raptor)
Plus, all that newly conflicted stuff will go into the secondary lines.
I predict that not only will the percentage of secondary lines grow to replace the 20% of reserve lines being put into it, the number of secondary lines will grow to include all of this. And, there is no language in the TA to keep the number of reserve lines we currently have, except we have to have 13% of R24. What stops the company from making secondary lines comprise 30-40% of the bid pack on their newly efficient PBS engine?
Sorry Raptor, but I think we all need to chew on this bone a bit more… You further go on to say:
My inner company planner comes out in "how am I going to maximize this" for the company's benefit. What I would do:
1) make every reserve line a carryover
2) in every secondary line that has reserve, make it carryover too
3) most all the reserve lines in normal bidpack no longer need to cover first week
4) minimize all the "normal" reserve lines so I can force more people into secondary lines (more lines in PBS is better for company)
I would do this because of one change in the TA...the one where reserve carryover kills the next month's trips instead of having the reserve dropped. This would put a lot of lines having trips or reserve dropped. Thus, number of secondary lines could be increased.
Take number of secondary lines as a percentage today. Add the 20% of reserve lines to that number (from the TA change), add to secondary the number of reserve lines you cut while making reserve lines minimal, add to the secondary lines all these trips dropped by doing what I suggested above and you have tremendous growth in secondary lines. Just by tweaking how I think as the company, I can probably double the number of secondary lines over what I have today. Welcome to a split crew force. The 50% bidding regular lines, the 10% bidding reserve, and the 40% in PBS.
Wait. I thought we held firm and stopped the company from instituting PBS?
The real problem here is that your logic is sound. This is a tremendous win for the company. On the one hand I have to hand it to their negotiators for such craftiness…
On the other hand, does anyone not think the company will not attempt to exploit this to the max extent possible?
In this TA we see in Section 25 alone, the company now has achieved scheduling flexibility gains that only fall short of a complete PBS system in percent implementation and name; trips can be changed and revised without 125% compensation, and the secondary line system is going to grow—to what degree who knows?
If you voted no to PBS, ask yourself, Are the dollars and enhancements this TA provides worth voting yes to and opening the door to PBS? Is it worth the certain give-away in our QOL?
Think carefully, because once we crack open the lid on this Pandora’s Box there’s no going back….
What I see in this TA is deftly crafted language to get PBS like scheduling efficiencies into our flying program. Its not that readily apparent if you just look at one section… but, when you start connecting the dots you begin to see a picture forming…
Section 25.S.2.e/d/f Disruptions. (From Block 6 Rep)
· Section 25.S.2.e.
You walk into AOC expecting to fly an easy GSO pm out and back. You’re senior, and you’re looking forward to a white box of catering, a quick nap in a hotel, and an early arrival back into MEM. Scheduling calls, and they need you to fly to CPR-BOI instead. You say, “But I didn’t bid CPR-BOI? I’m senior!” They say, “Enjoy your flight, you’ve been revised.” Management has been practicing this type of revision in the recent past. Now this Out and Back Disruption is institutionalized in the TA for 1.5 CH.
Section 25.S.2.d.
You are scheduled to be bumped for training on an augmented flight. You are looking forward to some time off at home with pay. Unfortunately, your RFO is unable to operate the trip. Now your phone is ringing, and it’s CRS calling you instead of a reserve pilot. Welcome to Crew Designation Disruption. Without any options, you now get to work the trip as an RF2 or RFO for 1.5 CH per flight.
Section 25.S.2.f.
You have packed your swimsuit and plan to spend your layover in the sun in FLL. Next thing you know, you are wishing you had packed your parka for YEG. What happened? Single Layover Disruption happened. The company needs a pilot up north, and for 3 CH you get to pay the price for not getting to fly south where your seniority is.
The addition of these Section 25 provisions codifies these “Trip Revisions” and removes the possibility of SUB with OTP options in these instances. CRS can now revise your trip using concrete language in the TA. The added CH penalty is nice, however, these revisions abrogate seniority; at their best they pay equal to or less than draft, and they give the pilots no options.
She is absolutely right! This TA has now codified trip revisions and given the company carte blanche to change your schedule WITHOUT YOUR INPUT OR APPROVAL.
Let me also quote from the letter entitled, “the give-backs”:
Beginning with Section 25, there are three new additions to section 25.S.2, which are paragraphs d, e, and f. These sections codify what the NC has stated that the company could do all along. But what they failed to point out are the nuances of substitution in our current CBA, in which the savvy pilot could either accept the new trip, or opt out for open time priority (OTP) at 125% of pairing CH. With these new additions to Section 25, these options could be removed, and the revision disruption pay would in many instances fall short of 125%.
In addition to these obvious give-backs, we must all give thanks to vc931, Raptor, Busdriver12 and CloudSailor for discussing this truly insidious backdoor PBS move by the company. Section 25.F.3.
3. A pilot’s current bid period schedule, inclusive of carryover R-days into the subsequent bid period, shall take precedence over a subsequent bid period award, except as follows…
Add this together with Section 25.A.4 (80% of all know reserve days, by crew position, shall be built into reserve lines published in the bid period package...Remaining reserve days will be made available as reserve blocks, in the View/Add Window, Secondary Working Window (SWW) and beyond.)
What we have now is reserve carry over that conflicts only under
very specific circumstances in the secondary window (Section
25.F.3-8). Consider the effect of an additional 20% of reserve
lines, and Raptor hits it on the nose!
(Raptor)
Plus, all that newly conflicted stuff will go into the secondary lines.
I predict that not only will the percentage of secondary lines grow to replace the 20% of reserve lines being put into it, the number of secondary lines will grow to include all of this. And, there is no language in the TA to keep the number of reserve lines we currently have, except we have to have 13% of R24. What stops the company from making secondary lines comprise 30-40% of the bid pack on their newly efficient PBS engine?
Sorry Raptor, but I think we all need to chew on this bone a bit more… You further go on to say:
My inner company planner comes out in "how am I going to maximize this" for the company's benefit. What I would do:
1) make every reserve line a carryover
2) in every secondary line that has reserve, make it carryover too
3) most all the reserve lines in normal bidpack no longer need to cover first week
4) minimize all the "normal" reserve lines so I can force more people into secondary lines (more lines in PBS is better for company)
I would do this because of one change in the TA...the one where reserve carryover kills the next month's trips instead of having the reserve dropped. This would put a lot of lines having trips or reserve dropped. Thus, number of secondary lines could be increased.
Take number of secondary lines as a percentage today. Add the 20% of reserve lines to that number (from the TA change), add to secondary the number of reserve lines you cut while making reserve lines minimal, add to the secondary lines all these trips dropped by doing what I suggested above and you have tremendous growth in secondary lines. Just by tweaking how I think as the company, I can probably double the number of secondary lines over what I have today. Welcome to a split crew force. The 50% bidding regular lines, the 10% bidding reserve, and the 40% in PBS.
Wait. I thought we held firm and stopped the company from instituting PBS?
The real problem here is that your logic is sound. This is a tremendous win for the company. On the one hand I have to hand it to their negotiators for such craftiness…
On the other hand, does anyone not think the company will not attempt to exploit this to the max extent possible?
In this TA we see in Section 25 alone, the company now has achieved scheduling flexibility gains that only fall short of a complete PBS system in percent implementation and name; trips can be changed and revised without 125% compensation, and the secondary line system is going to grow—to what degree who knows?
If you voted no to PBS, ask yourself, Are the dollars and enhancements this TA provides worth voting yes to and opening the door to PBS? Is it worth the certain give-away in our QOL?
Think carefully, because once we crack open the lid on this Pandora’s Box there’s no going back….
10-04-2015, 07:05 AM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,756
"The addition of these Section 25 provisions codifies these “Trip Revisions” and removes the possibility of SUB with OTP options in these instances. CRS can now revise your trip using concrete language in the TA."
Some of this is clear as mud to me. It looks as if substitution has not changed, which appears to be in conflict with a few of the provisions. The substitution section still says that you are to be offered substitution if your trip is cancelled, or there is a change of gauge. So I'm not sure how the out and back and single layover changes can get assigned, without putting you into sub first, which would mean that you could turn it down.
If one of these revisions happens on my trip before show, I think the first call would be to the scheduler, asking if my trip was cancelled, or if there was a change of equipment. If so-put me in sub, and I reject the trip (or accept it, if I want it). After show time, I don't know that you have any choice. But then, I wonder if they can say, "Oh, no, your trip wasn't cancelled, it was just revised. To something completely different." I'm not sure how this wouldn't completely abrogate the substitution section.
Some of this is clear as mud to me. It looks as if substitution has not changed, which appears to be in conflict with a few of the provisions. The substitution section still says that you are to be offered substitution if your trip is cancelled, or there is a change of gauge. So I'm not sure how the out and back and single layover changes can get assigned, without putting you into sub first, which would mean that you could turn it down.
If one of these revisions happens on my trip before show, I think the first call would be to the scheduler, asking if my trip was cancelled, or if there was a change of equipment. If so-put me in sub, and I reject the trip (or accept it, if I want it). After show time, I don't know that you have any choice. But then, I wonder if they can say, "Oh, no, your trip wasn't cancelled, it was just revised. To something completely different." I'm not sure how this wouldn't completely abrogate the substitution section.
10-04-2015, 07:16 AM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,820
Originally Posted by HercMasterJ
Section 25.S.2.e/d/f Disruptions. (From Block 6 Rep)
· Section 25.S.2.e.
You walk into AOC expecting to fly an easy GSO pm out and back. You’re senior, and you’re looking forward to a white box of catering, a quick nap in a hotel, and an early arrival back into MEM. Scheduling calls, and they need you to fly to CPR-BOI instead. You say, “But I didn’t bid CPR-BOI? I’m senior!” They say, “Enjoy your flight, you’ve been revised.” Management has been practicing this type of revision in the recent past. Now this Out and Back Disruption is institutionalized in the TA for 1.5 CH.
Section 25.S.2.f.
You have packed your swimsuit and plan to spend your layover in the sun in FLL. Next thing you know, you are wishing you had packed your parka for YEG. What happened? Single Layover Disruption happened. The company needs a pilot up north, and for 3 CH you get to pay the price for not getting to fly south where your seniority is.
The addition of these Section 25 provisions codifies these “Trip Revisions” and removes the possibility of SUB with OTP options in these instances. CRS can now revise your trip using concrete language in the TA. The added CH penalty is nice, however, these revisions abrogate seniority; at their best they pay equal to or less than draft, and they give the pilots no options.
She is absolutely right! This TA has now codified trip revisions and given the company carte blanche to change your schedule WITHOUT YOUR INPUT OR APPROVAL.
[
10-04-2015, 07:48 AM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 1,804
Originally Posted by pinseeker
The revisions mentioned could happen under the current contract and the 2006 contract which >90% of the membership approved. The difference now is that you get extra money for it. How does this codify these revisions more than the 9 years we have been working under the same rules?
10-04-2015, 08:35 AM
#10
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Posts: 26
Originally Posted by pinseeker
The revisions mentioned could happen under the current contract and the 2006 contract which >90% of the membership approved. The difference now is that you get extra money for it. How does this codify these revisions more than the 9 years we have been working under the same rules?
What bothers me far more than that, are the 20% reserve lines in the secondary plus the limited-conflicting carryover reserve. This is a genius stroke by the company and I don't think guys understand the gravity of this... The penny only recently dropped for me, so if I'm wrong, I sure would like to know why.
