Adlerdriver

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zW2cajHEvLc
TA Brief #3 at time 54:15

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CzGu_EaAvQ
Memphis Roadshow at time 20:45

In both briefings, Captain L refers to the flat-bed seats in comparison with the angled one Flaps just had the pleasure of using recently. His comments clearly address the superiority of the flat-bed over the angled. He refers to them researching the seats and they will provide an opportunity for better rest. What exactly is the point of research or telling us how bad the angled seats are if we're still going to get them anyway? I feel his statements definitely leave a reasonable viewer with the impression that the flat-bed was now supposed to be the expected seat and we will not be seeing the angled seat any longer.

"It's about getting rest and fatigue mitigation in that seat, the flat-bed, this isn't the one that goes at an angle and you wake up on your knees after you've taken a two-hour nap, these are the ones that go fully flat." (Captain L, Memphis roadshow, 9 Sep 2015)

Iwa Washi

Personally, if I was forced to fly across the pond by the company in an angled seat, whatever the contract language or negotiating committee blunders, I would call in fatigued. I'm not getting adequate rest and it is all about safety...

Fedex999999

HNL to KIX is just under 10 hours. They put us on Hawaiian where the seat just reclines like a domestic seat, just a little bit. Brutal.

Tuck

Yeah but don't u get another 24+ hrs on a layover before operating? I'm all for lie flats and FC but calling in fatigued at a hotel 24-48 hours prior to going to work? Really?

Tuck

I guess we just interpreted it differently. I saw it as I posted - we were giving up intl FC for lie flats when the contract allowed it. The primary difference in scheduling is that we used to have FC discount contracts with all these carriers and now we don't - so u get the business - even if it's an angled lie flat. Sucks but no change. JAL 787s only have business and they are all angles - so what's the argument? The comopany should adjust the schedule to find a lie flat for you on another carrier and a different route? If it's important to you, deviate. I've never had a problem finding a lie flat on my own in the past 10 years and I fly mostly intl always with at least one deadhead. You have to read the contract - ideally before voting on it.

FDXLAG

The only thing that has changed with this new contract is we are not getting the bank for the highest class of service (if a flat bed seat is booked) which I understand we are grieving. Otherwise the rules are the same for contract 2011 and contract 2015, particularly if the seat is not a flat bed. Now if anyone here actually thinks rejecting the 2015 contract would have resulted in more first class seats while we waited for a new contract, I guess we will have to disagree. The company has been tightening the rules for deadheads and banks for 10 years. We kept the same language we had for 10 years with some very minor improvements.

DLax85

I don't do international DHs, so I don't emerse myself in these portions of the contract

However, are your first & last sentences in your post consistent?

Adlerdriver

Really? read the contract? I did read the contract before I voted and I voted no.

Yes - I think the company should find an airline that offers a flat-bed seat for the scheduled ticket, especially if that means putting $ in our own country's airlines. We've conceded flat-bed as "satisfying" the higher class of service on over 16 hour duty DHs in the name of rest and fatigue mitigation. But, somehow those aren't an issue on a 15 hour duty DH where we still can find ourselves "waking up on our knees" in an angled seat? The DH that started this thread was LAX-KIX and the JAL flight appears to be the only non-stop. They could have just as easily had the first DH to SFO and then taken UAL from SFO to KIX. Then there would have been a flat-bed available in BC. I'd love to see how global travel got a $2031 fare on JAL, LAX-KIX. Every route pricing query I make on that route from next week to next month comes up with a BC fare over $10,000.

I read section 8 as well as I could since I too have been deviating on int'l DHs for close to 10 years. What's missing is the old "intent" statements in several key areas, this being one of them. I took SL's comments in the spirit of those intent statements and drew an incorrect conclusion. Since those guys were actually selling us the contract, I should have taken his comments in the spirit of a used car salesman - definitely my bad.

Just deviate isn't necessarily the solution you seem to think it is any longer. People were worried about reduced travel banks and rightly so. At one point is his comments, he even admits there are few times that the company has to buy full-fare first class tickets. If that was the case, why was this change desired by the company? It got them out of having to buy the occasional full-fare FC tickets on Emirates, Cathay, Singapore, etc. who have flat-beds in business. But it also gives them the FREQUENT opportunity to now buy discounted BC tickets on UAL and AA to Europe and Asia where they used to have to buy discounted FC. Both of those carriers still operate 3-class aircraft to many of our service locations overseas and they give us a discount. So, under the old contract, we would have gotten their discounted FC fare with which to deviate. Since they both have flat-bed in business class, now we get the discounted BC fare. So...sure, you can find a flat-bed seat. It's finding one you can get with the travel bank that's become the problem.

GT is now out of pocket since all or most of the travel bank is used on an airline ticket. If you want a backup option to still make your deviation, the new 18 hour check-in almost guarantees an early check-in at the hotel. Again, out of pocket.

For all this we get a better seat and some free drinks for 3-4 hours on some short haul DHs internationally. Often a personal upgrade on those same flights is only $50-100. Compared to what I'm going to spend on deviation tickets, GT and hotels getting into position under this new contract, I'm the one buying those upgrades, not the company. - so definitely not a good trade off.

FDXLAG

Yes. The only language that changed is the added provision for flat bed seats. An English language reading of the contract says ticket booked does not change bank authorized. That is what we were told when we voted. The company decided that that is not the way they will do business.

A business class seat over 5 hours and under 10 is all that has ever been required. Of the eight or so times the company booked me from MEM to CDG prior to contract 2015 six were bus class through DFW on their 76s. What has changed is the industry. Who would have guessed 5 years ago JAL would only offer LAX KIX two class service. FDX is taking advantage of the situation, no one is going to convince me us voting no would have kept the company from taking advantage of the system to reduce their costs. The language they are booking us business to KIX is the same language in the contract since at least contract 2006. The over 10 Business class seats are a result of the market changing not the contract. It agree it would be nice if the company paid for $10,000 seats when they only are required to pay $3000.

Tuck

We must just be flying completely different routes because I haven't had those problems...under the new contract flying primarily to Asia. There is NOTHING in the old or new that ever would have prevented them from putting u in a angled lie flat BC on a 15 hr duty DH if that's highest offered (JAL). On a positive note almost every carrier is switching to lie flats in business including JAL's archaic 787 hard product. This is the trend of the industry - remove first and replace with lie flat business - same on AA's 787. I attended all the meetings, read everything multiple times including all the Q&A and never got the impression you got. The company always will keep the option to re route u on pairings to keep DH costs down - that was the entire point of the change. We made a trade and in the long run I think it's worth it. U ever wonder why they use KE so much on multiple legs? Cause they like the price. They only reason they don't use (and no longer have a discounted contract with) Asiana is because it's off the acceptable carrier list.

I suspect your flight was a rare example of a low fare on JAL - u got unlucky. This is for next month so no established yet?? Look at AA 787 business to HND (unless they switched to 777) - usually very cheap. Yes the 18 hr rule sucks - one of the biggest negatives in my opinion. Is it in effect yet? It wasn't last week.