Yes, it should be rewritten. Airline contracts aren't exactly the pinnacle of contracts that other industry sectors look up to, unless you're a union buster. Have you ever actually written a contract or are you just being a useful pawn for someone?





The Railway Labor Act Simplified

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.

Im sorry but this is stupid and pointless. No matter how much a scenario is answered with TA language there is always something else you guys want to complain about. The sky is ******ing falling, Godzilla is 10 miles east of the BOS coast. RUN.

It's getting old. If you think your going to get everything you want in a TA, just get a molly and jumpstart the hallucination.

Imma need to get waayyyy higher if I'm gonna continue reading these.

I haven’t seen it, but if sounds too high. But maybe in the delta contract it is followed by a solution if it doesn’t happen. Just giving me the number 74 means nothing. If the contract has 74 times things like “the company will make a reasonable attempt at having the van pick up the crew within half an hour of on block” without “the crew can take a taxi and expense if the van isn’t there on time” then it is a bad contract. Either it needs to be rewritten or, more likely, there are sustained grievances already that limit the amount of interpretation the company has for “reasonable”.

If you aren't full of sh!t (which I think you are) then you have read Delta's contract very closely and know how much better it is in almost every section. Funny haw when we want to compare ourselves to DAL for pay it's "We will never be Delta.", however when it suits your low ball argument it's fine to use as a benchmark.

Also, you are completely making the 74 reasonable thing up.

The fact remains, the company negotiated to get "attempt" instead of "positive contact" for a reason. It is a loss for the pilot group. It was given away by the NC in exchange for something, or, more likely they just caved because they lack a spine.

I hope you negotiate our next contract Pog. You seem to know everything. ;)

On a short call out (or anything after DRO is published) I don’t think they’re going to push an assignment via Jetcrew and call that a positive contact attempt. They’re not now (and they could), why would they if this passes? Makes no sense….I could be wrong. But, if this passes, I bet a case of your favorite beverage this isn't an issue.

There is legit reasons to vote no (particularly if you’re very senior)…..but this sure isn’t one of them. I really like what our negotiators got here. I actually can’t believe they got us another 15mins….. “Thank You” NC! I say this because half of my call outs are “how fast can you get here” situations and I was sure the company would fight tooth and nail to keep the 2 hour window or maybe even tighten it up a bit. I also didn’t like playing the let it go to voicemail game.

Btw, you do realize you’re aligning yourself with a certain poster whom, at best, is a charlatan / worst case a total whack job?

You would swear POS actually did something for this pilot group....yet he knows best for all of us.

July 27th....

That is all.

No, no, no. Hyperboy is a yes voter.

[QUOTE=Gordie H;263905 While on short call, present time, if they push you an assignment that starts a few hours or more out (and it’s correct…i.e. you’re the guy that should get it, etc.) you acknowledge via Jetcrew, no need to talk to CS, good to go. If it’s a short call out situation usually the way it goes down is you get the first call and you don’t answer it (assuming you want the 15 extra minutes). The assignment is then pushed to you via Jetcrew and you see the report inside of 2 hours, so you don’t acknowledge it, but wait for them to call you again to establish a proper report time (i.e. 2 hours from then).
[/QUOTE]

I was in agreement with you up until the last bit, " but wait for them to call you again".

There's no "call you again" In that 15 minutes from their call, you're calling them.

Anyways, the notification in the TA is the same as it is today. The company gave up 15 minutes so that many of us wouldn't call back and bother the one overwhelmed CS employee.

As for POG and Q, I too am worried how this TA is vaguely written.

So what do you folks think about:
25.R.5.d The company shall notify a sc reserve before the end of the current day's RAP, regarding any modifications to the Pilot's RAP for the following day...

So now when the co figures out they don't have reserves for tomorrow, they'll call you today and CHANGE your RAP for tomorrow. No need for an accurate DRO...whenever that f'n thing gets published.