Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > JetBlue
Willingly violating the CBA 4x’s >

Willingly violating the CBA 4x’s

Search
Notices

Willingly violating the CBA 4x’s

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-10-2019, 06:07 PM
  #11  
The REAL Bluedriver
 
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Position: Airbus Capt
Posts: 6,881
Default

Originally Posted by Karl Hungas View Post
Keep tripping over yourselves ladies and gentlemen to get all that extra pay! Happy times here at the Blue, enjoy your days off... but... please come help the failing operation
Point Zero Zero Two.
Bluedriver is offline  
Old 08-10-2019, 07:19 PM
  #12  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Big E 757's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: A320 Left seat
Posts: 2,580
Default

Originally Posted by Karl Hungas View Post
Keep tripping over yourselves ladies and gentlemen to get all that extra pay! Happy times here at the Blue, enjoy your days off... but... please come help the failing operation
I’m an outsider, so forgive my ignorance, but what is illegal about the company offering premium pay for open time?

I’m assuming your contract has criteria that has to be satisfied before the company can offer premium pay???
Big E 757 is offline  
Old 08-10-2019, 07:25 PM
  #13  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: B6
Posts: 1,047
Default

Originally Posted by Big E 757 View Post
I’m an outsider, so forgive my ignorance, but what is illegal about the company offering premium pay for open time?

I’m assuming your contract has criteria that has to be satisfied before the company can offer premium pay???
For one it circumvents seniority and the way open time at premium pay is suppose to be given out and a violation of our CBA.
hyperboy is offline  
Old 08-10-2019, 07:44 PM
  #14  
On Reserve
 
Joined APC: Dec 2018
Posts: 13
Default

Exactly, thank you Hyper. Why have a CBA if the company just wipes their a$$ with it continuously
Karl Hungas is offline  
Old 08-10-2019, 08:15 PM
  #15  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Jun 2019
Posts: 442
Default

Originally Posted by Big E 757 View Post
I’m an outsider, so forgive my ignorance, but what is illegal about the company offering premium pay for open time?

I’m assuming your contract has criteria that has to be satisfied before the company can offer premium pay???
The implementation LOA prohibits the company from having a first come first serve premium open time pot until certain other provisions of the CBA (beneficial to pilots) are implemented. 5 times now, when the company is in a jam with staffing, they have done it anyway. This is 150% pay, mind you, and not subject to seniority. What IS allowed under the CBA/implementation LOA is VDA (volunteer on a day off) at 190% (soon to be 200%), or reserve support augmentation at 4:12/150% if not used, or what you actually credit at 175% if used. VDA is seniority based.

While premium FCFS pays pilots extra, those pilots would be paid VDA rates (assuming they signed up for it) and used in seniority order. So the company is blatantly violating the implementation LOA, to their benefit from a staffing standpoint and cost standpoint, knowing that the grievance won’t be heard until September, at which point premium FCFS is turned on anyway, and knowing under the RLA there isn’t much that can be done about it.

Ironically, right around the time of one of the violations not too long ago, they sent an email out about “integrity” with respect to picking up trips for the following day knowing their trip was delayed and might make them illegal (pay protecting the pilots). JB doesn’t update their delays in their systems, allowing guys to take advantage of that. All JB has to do is be more transparent with delays, instead of milking the ol 15 minute rolling delay, or not posting a downline delay they know will happen, but they choose not to. They speak out of both sides of their mouth with their “values” and only care about values when it benefits them, or use them to threaten pilots who take advantage of their lack of integrity (with respect to operationally delays), even if their own system says it’s a legal pickup.

Also, right before I think the second one, guys were still bargaining with crew services for double pay to help out. Crew services would agree to it over the phone, then they’d get paid straight pay. The chief pilot sent out an email saying “crew services can’t negotiate extra pay, you will only get paid in accordance with the CBA. No outside deals anymore.” Then they throw out a deal clearly in violation of the CBA right after bc they were in a jam and needed help. Then they realized there’s nothing much ALPA can do about it other than file a grievance, and started doing it a lot.

There are a few other nuances, but that’s the gist.

Last edited by jamesholzhauer; 08-10-2019 at 08:28 PM.
jamesholzhauer is offline  
Old 08-11-2019, 05:24 AM
  #16  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Oct 2016
Posts: 360
Default

So pathetic, and honestly what's the best case out of this? We grieve it, and then what?

Not only are they blatantly violating the CBA, but they're picking and choosing times and positions for this 'premium pay' in order to save the operation. "Only CA's in XYZ base before 9am". Total BS. If they can't even staff with VDAs then they need to hire/upgrade more.

My last couple trips were with bottom of the barrel junior captains on VDAs (Cold called, didn't even put in for VDA) being paid VDA rates for 2 and 3 full days. I don't blame the CAs one bit because that is serious money for them, but we clearly have a severe staffing issue in a specific seat that isn't being addressed.
AYLflyer is offline  
Old 08-11-2019, 05:48 AM
  #17  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: B6
Posts: 777
Default

So does this set legal precedent the next time the company says something not in the pilots favor that’s already implemented in the contract, that we don’t feel like doing? The are sending multiple messages and setting a pattern of letting us know, it’s ok to not follow the contract and that it’s perfectly fine.
Ted Striker is offline  
Old 08-11-2019, 09:09 AM
  #18  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Position: fifi whisperer
Posts: 1,255
Default

Originally Posted by CaptCoolHand View Post
This is why i voted yes. We were fighting an uphill battle against ourselves. Wasn’t worth the unknown.

Yup. I have to believe we’ll get em next time.

IMO, we didn’t do bad for our first time.
+2...........
seekingblue is offline  
Old 08-11-2019, 02:19 PM
  #19  
On Reserve
 
Joined APC: Jun 2019
Posts: 11
Default

To stop paying your mortgage isn't immoral, because this outcome is part of the contract you've entered with your bank. The penalty could be high, however, you're within your rights to do this. It's part of the agreement.

In much the same way, grievance/arbitration is part of the contract. The company can do whatever it wants as long as it's willing to bear the cost of the remedies. If ALPA wanted zero violations, they should have included more costly language. There's also no language against individual pilots picking up incentive open time. It was offered by the company in violation of the contract, resulting in a grievance per the agreement. No such agreement exists on the level of individual pilots.

Additionally, we know how people are going to behave. Banking on the entire pilot group to operating in lockstep is naive. The solution lies in the contract and its remedies, and not in yelling "Stop picking up incentive time!" on the internet.

And, considering that many pilots picking up this time live in base, and that JetBlue's bases exist in some of the most expensive areas in the country, I can't really blame them for this. To the commuters, these people could say, "Stop artificially subsidizing the company's labor supply!", but they don't.
eatittom is offline  
Old 08-11-2019, 03:36 PM
  #20  
Line holder
 
symbian simian's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: On the bus,seat 0A
Posts: 3,228
Default

Originally Posted by jamesholzhauer View Post
The implementation LOA prohibits the company from having a first come first serve premium open time pot until certain other provisions of the CBA (beneficial to pilots) are implemented. 5 times now, when the company is in a jam with staffing, they have done it anyway. This is 150% pay, mind you, and not subject to seniority. What IS allowed under the CBA/implementation LOA is VDA (volunteer on a day off) at 190% (soon to be 200%), or reserve support augmentation at 4:12/150% if not used, or what you actually credit at 175% if used. VDA is seniority based.

While premium FCFS pays pilots extra, those pilots would be paid VDA rates (assuming they signed up for it) and used in seniority order. So the company is blatantly violating the implementation LOA, to their benefit from a staffing standpoint and cost standpoint, knowing that the grievance won’t be heard until September, at which point premium FCFS is turned on anyway, and knowing under the RLA there isn’t much that can be done about it.

Ironically, right around the time of one of the violations not too long ago, they sent an email out about “integrity” with respect to picking up trips for the following day knowing their trip was delayed and might make them illegal (pay protecting the pilots). JB doesn’t update their delays in their systems, allowing guys to take advantage of that. All JB has to do is be more transparent with delays, instead of milking the ol 15 minute rolling delay, or not posting a downline delay they know will happen, but they choose not to. They speak out of both sides of their mouth with their “values” and only care about values when it benefits them, or use them to threaten pilots who take advantage of their lack of integrity (with respect to operationally delays), even if their own system says it’s a legal pickup.

Also, right before I think the second one, guys were still bargaining with crew services for double pay to help out. Crew services would agree to it over the phone, then they’d get paid straight pay. The chief pilot sent out an email saying “crew services can’t negotiate extra pay, you will only get paid in accordance with the CBA. No outside deals anymore.” Then they throw out a deal clearly in violation of the CBA right after bc they were in a jam and needed help. Then they realized there’s nothing much ALPA can do about it other than file a grievance, and started doing it a lot.

There are a few other nuances, but that’s the gist.
That is definitely a lot of $h/t
symbian simian is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
steamgauge
Cargo
95
03-24-2013 05:55 PM
viperdriver
Cargo
50
01-28-2013 05:38 PM
Fins Up
Union Talk
26
07-28-2011 05:41 PM
Opposing View
Cargo
62
03-07-2011 04:55 PM
fedupbusdriver
Cargo
18
07-26-2007 07:57 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices