Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major
Alaska Virgin new contract details >

Alaska Virgin new contract details

Search
Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

Alaska Virgin new contract details

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10-30-2017, 07:45 PM
  #1  
New Hire
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 5
Default Alaska Virgin new contract details

Scope:
None

Retirement:
Nov 1 2017 = 15% DC
Jan 1 2019 = 15.5% DC


Pay:

ASCapt is offline  
Old 10-30-2017, 08:27 PM
  #2  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,512
Default

Min calendar day?

Other work rules?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
RiddleEagle18 is offline  
Old 10-30-2017, 08:33 PM
  #3  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: Jet
Posts: 214
Default

Originally Posted by RiddleEagle18 View Post
Min calendar day?

Other work rules?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Scope, Retirement, and Pay rates were the only things on the table. These results were handed down by an arbitration panel due to Alaska and ALPA not being able to negotiate amongst themselves. Arbitrators sided with Alaka mgt for the most part.
The rest of the contract opens up to Sec 6 in a couple years. No f ing around then I would hope.

Last edited by Bugaboo; 10-30-2017 at 08:46 PM.
Bugaboo is offline  
Old 10-31-2017, 01:47 AM
  #4  
Gets Weekends Off
 
rightside02's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: Airbus 320 Right Seat
Posts: 1,440
Default

I will admit in an not vastly educated in the process , but how does an arbitrator side with the company on zero scope constraints !?!? I mean put some protections in there for the other group .
rightside02 is offline  
Old 10-31-2017, 03:31 AM
  #5  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Posts: 389
Default

Originally Posted by rightside02 View Post
I will admit in an not vastly educated in the process , but how does an arbitrator side with the company on zero scope constraints !?!? I mean put some protections in there for the other group .
The way they put it is the company hasn't violated the spirit of proposed scope and it's a complex issue that is best handled in direct negotiation.
IDIOTPILOT is offline  
Old 10-31-2017, 04:33 AM
  #6  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,117
Default

Didn't Alaska go to arbitration several years ago? Pretty sure the pilots came up with the short end of the stick in that one..
FL370esq is offline  
Old 10-31-2017, 06:20 AM
  #7  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: Office Chair
Posts: 629
Default

My pay per actual hour blocked would still be less under that pay scale than what it is here under current book with paid transition conflict, vacation, and training drops. How much soft time are you paid here in a given year?
FLYBOYMATTHEW is offline  
Old 10-31-2017, 08:00 AM
  #8  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 443
Default

Originally Posted by RiddleEagle18 View Post
Min calendar day?

Other work rules?
From the UAL contract comparison:

5:00 av duty period guarantee

1:2 duty rig

1:1.75 wocl duty rig

1:3.5 trip rig

no uniform expenses

no passport/visa expenses

meal/internet reimbursed on dh

short call 79 hr guar, 15 hour raps, 8 days off

Long call 75 hr guarantee 12 days off

parking only in domicile

no hotels for new hires, training in base, or lost RON in base

line holders 8 days off, lines built to 75-85 hrs allowed flex up to 88 a few times a year

I have verified the 8 days off with a friend who is a new hire. Has the 1745 RAP and his day "off" starts at 1245 PM. Guess they get 288 hours off a month on reserve.
shfo is offline  
Old 10-31-2017, 08:53 AM
  #9  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2013
Posts: 647
Default

Originally Posted by IDIOTPILOT View Post
The way they put it is the company hasn't violated the spirit of proposed scope and it's a complex issue that is best handled in direct negotiation.
In other words... "They haven't done it YET and that's somehow a rationale to keep anything from being put in writing to prevent them from inevitably doing it in the future."

Unreal. Didn't BM even specifically talk about reconfiguring the Q400's for 88 seats in his testimony?

Also from the full text of the award:
That the parties have failed to reach an agreement adding these enhanced protections
in past negotiations is not only a reflection of its intricacy but also its relative lack of
urgency.
WHAT?? What the f@ck does that even mean? One party (company) completely refuses to negotiate on scope and therefore it's not an urgent issue for the other party (pilots)?? How does that even make sense?
echelon is offline  
Old 10-31-2017, 10:02 AM
  #10  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: Right Window
Posts: 138
Default

I’m pretty sure Alaska “made it worth their while” to judge the way they did. It’s the only logical way I can get to the arbitrators ruling.

I guess the lesson is, never again agree to binding arbitration in any section of the contract...
FlyAK is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
vagabond
Major
14
01-29-2010 04:46 PM
⌐ AV8OR WANNABE
Major
41
03-15-2009 04:35 AM
vagabond
Aviation Law
10
09-20-2008 12:50 PM
vagabond
Major
19
06-15-2007 06:29 PM
WatchThis!
Major
0
07-10-2005 03:55 PM

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