|
Originally Posted by seekingblue
(Post 2633155)
Per the Q and A:
Section 25.R.6.b What if a pilot attempts to call back within this 15 min window but is forced to be on an extended hold time on the phone system? It’s common during bad weather days to be on hold over 20-30 min. How does the phone tree “callback” option apply to this as well? Per this section, the pilot has 15 minutes to initiate a responding call to Crew Services. The initiation of the call satisfies the response requirement. The pilot would still be responsible for reporting for duty no less than 2:30 hours (plus additional time for co-bases) after the initial contact attempt by Crew Services. When lengthy hold times are in effect, the callback option would at least provide a record that the pilot attempted contact with Crew Services. Edit: what you and Queue seem to be missing is that these rules weren't created in a vacuum. There are thousands of pages of notes (explaining intent of each piece of the contract). This would be an example of where this applies. |
Originally Posted by Bluedriver
(Post 2633164)
And for being released after a cancellation package in a level 2? How long past the end of the "completed by 00:00" do you need to stay on hold or wait for the "call back"?
Can you please submit to the ALPA Q&A section? I'd like to see what notes they have on the subject. |
Originally Posted by seekingblue
(Post 2633166)
No idea. It's a reasonable question. My guess is that you are free to go after the reassignment time has passed with a good faith attempt to contact CS.
Can you please submit to the ALPA Q&A section? I'd like to see what notes they have on the subject. The actual answer doesn't matter in the context of the vote. The TA is the TA is the TA. Even if we HATE the answer, it's not changing, so vote YES, vote NO, whatever. The answer will be important to those it affects in the day-to-day operation and will be resolved via "grievance" I'm quite sure. |
Originally Posted by Bluedriver
(Post 2633220)
The answer will be important to those it affects in the day-to-day operation and will be resolved via "grievance" I'm quite sure.
And that's the problem... the grievance process breeds DEPENDENCY. The more vague the "contract", the more grievance you need, the more $$$ lawyers make. This is a business for them (and ALPA). BJ will exploit the TA's weaknesses to the legal limit. They have a LONG history of doing that. If you have to ask someone else about what the TA means, then it's a badly written TA. No amount of roadshows will fix the existing TA. Only Voting NO then fixing the TA will fix the root cause. This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations. |
Originally Posted by queue
(Post 2633227)
And that's the problem... the grievance process breeds DEPENDENCY. The more vague the "contract", the more grievance you need, the more $$$ lawyers make. This is a business for them (and ALPA).
BJ will exploit the TA's weaknesses to the legal limit. They have a LONG history of doing that. If you have to ask someone else about what the TA means, then it's a badly written TA. No amount of roadshows will fix the existing TA. Only Voting NO then fixing the TA will fix the root cause. 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. What are you going to do after July 27th? I honestly hope we can be a strong and united group- no matter the vote. Also, the question has been asked, and I’m honestly curious: are you a lawyer? Or do you have any legal experience? Why aren’t you on JBLU pilots or bluepilots? Something to verify you really are a Jetblue Pilot. |
Originally Posted by seekingblue
(Post 2633257)
Queue-
What are you going to do after July 27th? I honestly hope we can be a strong and united group- no matter the vote. Also, the question has been asked, and I’m honestly curious: are you a lawyer? Or do you have any legal experience? Why aren’t you on JBLU pilots or bluepilots? Something to verify you really are a Jetblue Pilot. What I do after the 27th is contingent upon whether we vote in the TA or not. If it doesn't pass and we get a chance to TA 2.0, I will try to influence TA 2.0. However, a vital ingredient to TA 2.0 will be the pilot group willing to do informational pickets often. If we can't persuade BJ with power, then the legalese will never get a chance to happen. Furthermore, our MEC/NC needs to a swift kick in the arse to stop hiding behind surveys and ALPA status-quo as a reason for their lack of aggressiveness. They need to gain a military mindset with a shock-and-awe, overwhelming dominance conviction. If TA 1.0 gets passed, then I need to explore legal options to stop funding an organization I do not temporarily agree with until a time at which the right people can be put into servant positions. Then we can exercise our yet non-existent free will option to fund them. As you know, the Supreme Court ruled in the favor of non-lanyard wearers not paying union dues for public unions. The same precedent can be used to get the freedom to choose to fund ALPA or not. It just hasn't been taken to court, although I feel it would be an easy victory against forced payment. The ultimate goal is to keep our union accountable to getting us an industry rate/industry leading contract. Of course this is just an option and not one I'm in favor of because of the risk of causing permanent damage to ALPA, which I do not want. I simply want to make ALPA into a winning formula, not the loser it is now. The only reason they can claim any victory is because they are a monopoly. So all the "yes" voters can really only make an argument citing "it's better than what we had before". When you have a monopoly, you only progress just enough to say "you're better than what you had before". I won't be happy until pilots from other airlines envy being a BJ pilot because of pay and rules. That hasn't happened because ALPA hasn't delivered. If we gained the ability to break the monopoly by having the freedom to choose whether we fund something or not, then we all win. Then ALPA will have to PERFORM in order to gain funding. I'll be happy to pay $$$ if ALPA delivers results. However, TA 1.0 is a failure. Look at pay rates alone... they are already substandard particularly when you subtract out (1.9%++ or ~2.1% from ALPA dues alone). I don't want to answer about my credentials. I need to remain anonymous to be effective. I also don't want people to trust others (or me) simply because they are making an "authority position" argument (e.g. I have a PHD after my name so only I can be right... I'm an ALPA MEC veteran so I know more than you). You can judge my viewpoints on their merit alone. My agenda is simple: make this profession professional again with professional pay and work rules. JBLU pilots and Bluepilots are not anonymous. Someone knows who you are. If BJ wanted to, there are legal mechanisms to unmask those people (subpoena). Plus, I'm not convinced that Bluepilots isn't run by BJ in some way to serve as a honeypot. JBLU pilots is well intentioned but is flawed because you are easily unmasked through legal mechanisms. Here's something I just got in the mail.... https://preview.ibb.co/fgzg98/propaganda.jpg 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. |
Originally Posted by seekingblue
(Post 2633257)
Queue-
What are you going to do after July 27th? I honestly hope we can be a strong and united group- no matter the vote. Also, the question has been asked, and I’m honestly curious: are you a lawyer? Or do you have any legal experience? Why aren’t you on JBLU pilots or bluepilots? Something to verify you really are a Jetblue Pilot. |
Originally Posted by say again
(Post 2633334)
He's obviously not. Easy to ignore...
Believe what you will... it doesn't change anything. If BJ becomes a better place for pilots, I win (and you win). Don't descend from the MSA on a visual approach unless you're established on a segment of an instrument approach. It's far safer and you can avoid terrain warnings. 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. |
Originally Posted by queue
(Post 2633327)
What I do after the 27th is contingent upon whether we vote in the TA or not. If it doesn't pass and we get a chance to TA 2.0, I will try to influence TA 2.0. However, a vital ingredient to TA 2.0 will be the pilot group willing to do informational pickets often. If we can't persuade BJ with power, then the legalese will never get a chance to happen. Furthermore, our MEC/NC needs to a swift kick in the arse to stop hiding behind surveys and ALPA status-quo as a reason for their lack of aggressiveness. They need to gain a military mindset with a shock-and-awe, overwhelming dominance conviction. If TA 1.0 gets passed, then I need to explore legal options to stop funding an organization I do not temporarily agree with until a time at which the right people can be put into servant positions. Then we can exercise our yet non-existent free will option to fund them. As you know, the Supreme Court ruled in the favor of non-lanyard wearers not paying union dues for public unions. The same precedent can be used to get the freedom to choose to fund ALPA or not. It just hasn't been taken to court, although I feel it would be an easy victory against forced payment. The ultimate goal is to keep our union accountable to getting us an industry rate/industry leading contract. Of course this is just an option and not one I'm in favor of because of the risk of causing permanent damage to ALPA, which I do not want. I simply want to make ALPA into a winning formula, not the loser it is now. The only reason they can claim any victory is because they are a monopoly. So all the "yes" voters can really only make an argument citing "it's better than what we had before". When you have a monopoly, you only progress just enough to say "you're better than what you had before". I won't be happy until pilots from other airlines envy being a BJ pilot because of pay and rules. That hasn't happened because ALPA hasn't delivered. If we gained the ability to break the monopoly by having the freedom to choose whether we fund something or not, then we all win. Then ALPA will have to PERFORM in order to gain funding. I'll be happy to pay $$$ if ALPA delivers results. However, TA 1.0 is a failure. Look at pay rates alone... they are already substandard particularly when you subtract out (1.9%++ or ~2.1% from ALPA dues alone).
I don't want to answer about my credentials. I need to remain anonymous to be effective. I also don't want people to trust others (or me) simply because they are making an "authority position" argument (e.g. I have a PHD after my name so only I can be right... I'm an ALPA MEC veteran so I know more than you). You can judge my viewpoints on their merit alone. My agenda is simple: make this profession professional again with professional pay and work rules. JBLU pilots and Bluepilots are not anonymous. Someone knows who you are. If BJ wanted to, there are legal mechanisms to unmask those people (subpoena). Plus, I'm not convinced that Bluepilots isn't run by BJ in some way to serve as a honeypot. JBLU pilots is well intentioned but is flawed because you are easily unmasked through legal mechanisms. Here's something I just got in the mail.... https://preview.ibb.co/fgzg98/propaganda.jpg 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. |
Currently JetBlue staffs approximately 15 pilots per plane. Any mathematical formula how they currently come to this result and could it be applied to the new TA rules for a guestimate of required pilot numbers under the TA?
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:24 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands