I didn’t see it either. But there’s a lot to read

 

And one other thing that doesn’t sit with me is the 321 override. It may not seem like much but who’s to stop them from making us an entire 321 fleet in 5 years. That’s equivalent of circumventing scope to me. For every 3 321s that come on property that’s 1 less 320. 1 less island turn or transcon to bid That’s less pilots, less movement. I equiviate that aircraft to a 757

 

Wow, this poop-pile gets worse and worse...


Clauses C,D, and E are subject to interpretation (bad). There must be a definition of "taken into consideration" such as "a Pilot is solely authorized to determine and define what adequate considerations are, not subject to questioning by the Company. If a pilot believes he has made adequate considerations, then such considerations have been made and are not questionable by the Company." Otherwise, this allows BJ or an arbitrator (since it's mentioned elsewhere) to determine if a consideration was made. Basically, we lose the power.



Again, consideration must be whatever the pilot considers adequate, not by BJ interpretation.

And if you think it takes you 20 minutes, the company can come back and say that "adequate time" is 1 hour. You're screwed.

And when does this point start at? The beginning of the call or when/if you get "positive contact" with an actual Crew Services person? We all know you can be on hold for an hour or more, particularly when the connection drops. Also, by the time you're finished being on hold, now your notification to CS will occur INSIDE the 3 HR period turning a simple Unable to Commute into a Missed Trip. There is so much missing in this language...

This is very dangerous language. It NEEDS to include verbiage such as "a Pilot is never required to mutually agree upon an assignment and no addition burden (e.g. safety report, e-mail to chief pilot, irregularity report, etc.) shall be required of the Pilot to explain why the Pilot does not want to mutually agree to another assignment. A Pilot may not be held liable to any disciplinary process or as the subject of evidence to be used in a disciplinary process if he does not mutually agree to an assignment." Example of how you can get screwed.... right now if you don't extend an additional 2 hrs, they are forcing you to write a fatigue report OR you are subject to disciplinary action. In other words, they are opening the door to attaching informal retribution or punishment to not agreeing to another assignment.

• Commuting Strategy? So the TITLE already starts with an invisible line since it's a "strategy".
• "A Chief Pilot may discuss patterns of commuting problems with the Pilot in an effort to resolve such issues by identifying the source of the problem and assisting in developing alternative commuting
  strategies." Needs to include a clause "However, this meeting may not be recorded in any fashion to be used as evidence for disciplinary processes or consideration for future job assignment (e.g. to become a Check Airman). A pilot reporting for such a meeting must be paid at least 4 hrs of duty time and may utilize Positive Space commuting at the sole discretion of the pilot. The Chief Pilot may not dictate a timeline for the meeting and shall make himself available to the Pilot for the Pilot's scheduling convenience. "
• "Repeated mis-commutes may be considered in evaluations of a commuting Pilot’s overall dependability." Ahh yes... so this legalizes the completely arbitrarily interpreted and enforced infamous Dependability Policy. This is a HORRIBLE contract. It outsources terms and conditions to other BJ documents they can rewrite at any time. It's a contract version of the FOM and Blue Book.

I could've written something better in my sleep! Seriously boys and girls... if something isn't explicitly written out in the contract, it gives BJ free reign to do whatever they want. In many cases, as presented above, it legalizes processes that are entirely BJ defined/re-defined whenever they want. Unequal justice.

No wonder apologists/defeatists like Bozo had to block me! They wanted to hide this kind of stuff. Either they work for BJ to get you to accept this garbage OR they are too vested in the process to see further work being done on this contract. There is so much in here that could easily screw us. It's almost as if BJ wrote this thing!

This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.

 

Protects vacation.

System bid happens before vacations bid. You bid vacation in your awarded category.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Plus it benefits only people who have the seniority to exploit it. 60% of the pilot group won't be able to bid for 321s so you'll be stuck with peasant pay rates. This is one of the reasons I kept saying the AIP pay rates were unacceptable.



This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.

 

And everyone on here, I'm not trying to convince anyone to vote No. And most of us are stuck here and trying to make it the best place possible, but ask yourselves if there's anything in this TA that's the envy of the industry. Is some guy/gal over at DAL/AA/UAL, be like "oh sh*t, you see what B6 got, I wish we had that"
Juvenile and unrealistic, probably, but can we lead in something besides being late.
If you can answer Yes, be it scope or scheduling, I understand and support the Yes vote, and won't complain if it passes. Except maybe when I hear a DAL captain taking home 70k on profit sharing

 

[QUOTE=queue;2621963]Plus it benefits only people who have the seniority to exploit it. 60% of the pilot group won't be able to bid for 321s so you'll be stuck with peasant pay rates. This is one of the reasons I kept saying the AIP pay rates were unacceptable.


Thats fine, seniority is seniority. I just want to keep mgmt in check from exploiting a loophole

 

[QUOTE=N311JB;2621969]
I'll concede on the benefit to seniority. I don't want it but ok.


I'm just glad you don't want loopholes. This TA is horrible. Literally every paragraph has loopholes.


This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.

 

It's everything I've been saying all along :-)


Well, it's our fault. If this turd gets voted Yes, and if there's no resistance to this TA, then it's really our fault. We got played... we got played bad.



This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.

 

We get an “Eat up Box” if our flight exceeds 3.5 hours! Outstanding... #Keepsgettingbetter! High five