Up and Out Policies: Upgrade
10-28-2008, 12:53 PM
#161
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: Student Pilot
Posts: 849
Originally Posted by dojetdriver
Too bad there isn't a legally binding document to enforce work rules, instead of a "policy handbook".
Originally Posted by TonyWilliams
Well, there is. Court.
Aren't company policies subject to change at any time for any reason mgmt pleases? That's certainly the way it is at colgan, we have a "employee handbook" but they change the rules whenever they want. might as well not even have any rules.
10-28-2008, 01:08 PM
#162
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: Self employed
Posts: 3,048
Originally Posted by kalyx522
I don't know if an "employee handbook" would hold up in court?
Aren't company policies subject to change at any time for any reason mgmt pleases? That's certainly the way it is at colgan, we have a "employee handbook" but they change the rules whenever they want. might as well not even have any rules.
Aren't company policies subject to change at any time for any reason mgmt pleases? That's certainly the way it is at colgan, we have a "employee handbook" but they change the rules whenever they want. might as well not even have any rules.
This goes off on the union tangent..... SkW does have an employee handbook. I believe there is also a company policy manual and a crew members policy manual. Items in the latter are negotiated and approved with voted in pilot representatives in SAPA. They aren't changed "willy nilly".
I'll repeat the point I've made a few times regarding the rule at SkW. The folks who currently run the pilot organization, and I believe any future possible labor union, do not support a change to the up-n-out rule.
There's no magic there.
As to issues with my training regarding the policy manual, or established practice; they would have to be handled by legal counsel that I would retain. If it were a union shop, that union MAY elect to pursue this. There is no guarantee there, either.
But, like insurance, generally the union will take all the risk for costs associated with your case.
10-28-2008, 01:16 PM
#163
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,382
Originally Posted by kalyx522
I don't know if an "employee handbook" would hold up in court?
Aren't company policies subject to change at any time for any reason mgmt pleases? That's certainly the way it is at colgan, we have a "employee handbook" but they change the rules whenever they want. might as well not even have any rules.
Aren't company policies subject to change at any time for any reason mgmt pleases? That's certainly the way it is at colgan, we have a "employee handbook" but they change the rules whenever they want. might as well not even have any rules.
Also the company has to be consistent in it's application of the policy...if it twists the meaning for one employee, but not others, it will lose that lawsuit too.
Most large companies don't try to play these games, too much money to lose. But pilots, especially at the entry level, are notoriously inexperienced and afraid to make waves. Some of this is for good reason...leaving an employer under contentious circumstances may hurt your future job prospects in this industry.
10-30-2008, 12:07 PM
#164
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: EMB 145 CPT
Posts: 2,934
I just spent the last twenty minutes or so reading this entire thread and I wanted to make some comments on multiple posts but first let me just say that I feel sincerely bad that this has happened to TW or anyone else that were forced to quit or fired because of this type of policy. I don't agree with it although I think it might have some merits. I just feel that on ballance that its not worth the career distruction it causes. In other words, its using a chainsaw when orthroscopic surgery is all that is needed. In any case, whether this type of policy exists or something more along the lines of "train to proficiency", (which has its bad points also), there needs to be a mechanism to force an impartial person to make a decision taking into account the facts if the parties cannot agree. Again, I feel this is the case with either an up & out policy or a train to proficiency policy. At the least, it takes any appearance of maliciousness away and in the best case, it treats everyone fairly without the fear of unrepairable consequences or retribution.
One of the things that irks me the most about workplaces is the presence of a good 'ole boys club. Not that its a 100% sure way of preventing one but a union usually does pretty good at assuring the company treats everyone equally.
Assuming that ALPA was successful, it would have put you into status quo. The current policies would remain in effect, as is, until a CBA was signed. Normally an MEC polls its members before negotiations to see what they want. If this policy was something they wanted changed, it probably would be something they would try to do. At the least, it seems like there are many things that can be improved and clarafied on this policy and that probably would be something attainable on a first CBA.
I wonder if this guy was out to get you?
I personally feel that is an unfortunate position to put someone in because of this policy. Hopefully it turns out good for him.
This is true. I had a friend who failed his initial IOE under questionalbe circumctances as well and I helped him get a job at XJT a couple of months later.
During the Skywest ALPA drive when I would talk to pilots about this policy they always told me that they very rarely fired anyone under this policy unless they deserved it. And I would ask them how would anyone know if that was true? And even if you knew all 5 guys that failed in the last 4 years, how would anyone know if they deserved it? My feeling was that Skywest, like any company, doesn't air its dirty laundry. TW is right, they don't want to discourage anyone from upgrading. Things like this can happen more than anyone would know without any accountability. You only hear about rumors that probably are not true either but the point is that no one really knows what the truth is without someone making sure everything is legit.
Even if what you say is true, the last defense is always with the vote of the rank and file. If there was a union there, the representatives would be voted in by the rank and file. The rank and file could vote anyone in with the issues that they feel are important to them. If this is a policy they feel is important, they can vote for those who agree with them on it. And lastly, if the tentative agreement didn't have the language that the rank and file didn't approve on, they can vote it down and send them back to the table. And they can vote to recall anyone as well
I think this is probably standard at any pilot union. You are covered by all aspects of the CBA except for the right to arbitrate.
See my reply to reelbigchair above. The power lies with the rank and file.
For me the point is that there was no one there for TW to go to bat with him and make sure everything was kosher. If there was more than meets the eye, there needs to be a mechanism to get the full story, lay out the facts, and make a fair decision.
I think all airlines have pilots that get fired for the things you mentioned. Those are pretty cut and dry and nothing will stop a company from firing those people. But its for the grey areas or things that happen because of extenuating circumstances or simply because life happens. There needs to be a way of pleaing your case of innocence until proven otherwise.
This is precisely why there needs to be a way to have an impartial system to figure out if there was underlying issues and if those issues are legitimate. Personality conflicts should NEVER be a contributing factor in the decision to fire a pilot during upgrade.
The folks who currently run the pilot organization aren't necesarily the same folks who would be the elected representatives of a union there. It comes down to the rank and file making this an issue in who runs, who they vote for, and how they vote on a tentative agreement.
With a union shop, or at least ALPA, you would always get to greive this. And you would also be able to appeal the greivance as well. As for taking it the last step of arbitration, that would be up to the MEC to decide. I can tell you that at XJT, the MEC was prepared to take a verbal warning (the lowest level of discipline that doesn't even go in your file) to arbitration. The MEC felt that what the company was doing was not fair in light of the circumstances. Many of these things have precedence issues attached to them as well so that you only have make the issue once.
Leaving an employer in the circumstances that TW left didn't help his job prospects in the industry either. But you make a very good point. How many people have been fired and not make waves as DD did so as to not ruin their future prospects in the industry. Like I said, there needs to be an easier way for people to not let large companies make calculated risks in their firing decisions.
Originally Posted by TonyWilliams
Would it have made sense to send me back as an FO on the CRJ ? I'd say yes, but the current rules don't allow for that, unless you're in the good 'ole boy club, etc.
Originally Posted by TonyWilliams
I think it was already stated... whatever labor representation that we (ok, them!) have, if the collective bargaining labor contract says you're canned after failing an upgrade training event, guess what? You're still canned.
The grossly unscientific poll I saw on the SAPA forum was that 25% supported Up-n-Out. I suspect that out of that 25%, virtually all were captains who "already got their's". So, since the current SAPA board is 95% captains, I wouldn't think it would change. And the same would be true if it was a labor union, as I suspect the same thinking would prevail.
The grossly unscientific poll I saw on the SAPA forum was that 25% supported Up-n-Out. I suspect that out of that 25%, virtually all were captains who "already got their's". So, since the current SAPA board is 95% captains, I wouldn't think it would change. And the same would be true if it was a labor union, as I suspect the same thinking would prevail.
Originally Posted by TonyWilliams
I was so wound up, I couldn't get on my motorcycle to ride back to the hotel for about 3 hours. My sim partner, who didn't get signed off for the sim check ride, did his oral after me. He didn't get much of an oral at all. He said he just asked him a couple questions, and was on the phone the rest of the time rescheduling stuff.
I asked him the next day (while he was issuing my second pink slip) how many folks got the "50ft minimum approach light" question right. He said almost nobody.
I asked him the next day (while he was issuing my second pink slip) how many folks got the "50ft minimum approach light" question right. He said almost nobody.
I wonder if this guy was out to get you?
Originally Posted by TonyWilliams
Of the ten folks who signed up for the class, one didn't show (were told he got a job in Citation), one failed the written, passed on retake, and quit. Presumably, he thought he wouldn't complete training, and by quitting prior to FTD/Sim, it doesn't show up as a PRIA. He could actually just reapply, and get hired back on at SkyWest or anywhere... a wise move. And, of course, I failed.
Originally Posted by Seattlecfi
As what TW said, up or out, is different than qualify in turn. Failing a checkride is also not the end of your career. I interviewed at NWA with a couple of people who had failed checkrides, and they were hired. They don't get the PRIA paperwork until after you interview and have a chance to explain what happened.
Originally Posted by TonyWilliams
I just had a chat with my favorite attorney this evening. The one thing that jumped out to this attorney was how the company regularly, and persistently reminded you that this program was "up-r-out", but would usually qualify that by saying that almost nobody fails training at SkW.
One of the SAPA reps was in that first Metro upgrade class when it was announced (after the class started) that the new policy was "up-r-out". So, when the group became unresponsive in class, the instructor reassured them with, "who do you know that has ever failed a SkW training event?"
He passed, but the reality is folks do not pass. Not very many. But way more than 5 in 4 years. It's just quietly shuffled under the carpet when it happens. We heard that a female new hire had just failed the ground school written exam twice. She was fired, but offered to reapply in 6 months.
But the two female upgrades who failed before our class (unsubstantiated rumor), of course, were fired just like me.
And naturally, they don't include the folks who quit, like the one guy who did in my class, just after the ground written. He basically quit in lieu of waiting to fail and then getting fired.
One of the SAPA reps was in that first Metro upgrade class when it was announced (after the class started) that the new policy was "up-r-out". So, when the group became unresponsive in class, the instructor reassured them with, "who do you know that has ever failed a SkW training event?"
He passed, but the reality is folks do not pass. Not very many. But way more than 5 in 4 years. It's just quietly shuffled under the carpet when it happens. We heard that a female new hire had just failed the ground school written exam twice. She was fired, but offered to reapply in 6 months.
But the two female upgrades who failed before our class (unsubstantiated rumor), of course, were fired just like me.
And naturally, they don't include the folks who quit, like the one guy who did in my class, just after the ground written. He basically quit in lieu of waiting to fail and then getting fired.
Originally Posted by reelbigchair
If it would change the policy, sign me up......
However, when I learned of Tony's situation, and I began talking to my captains about the policy, I learned that the vast majority of them support the policy. (Again an unscientific poll of ORD based capts.)
And being that ALPA at each airline, is run by that airline's pilots, I feel fairly certain that this paticular policy would stick. The airline for whatever reason likes it, and unfortunately a large sector of our pilots support it.
However, when I learned of Tony's situation, and I began talking to my captains about the policy, I learned that the vast majority of them support the policy. (Again an unscientific poll of ORD based capts.)
And being that ALPA at each airline, is run by that airline's pilots, I feel fairly certain that this paticular policy would stick. The airline for whatever reason likes it, and unfortunately a large sector of our pilots support it.
Originally Posted by sigep_nm
I think at Mesaba we may employ a similar policy for people upgrading prior to being off probation. In that case the union can do nothing for you, but after you are off probation, you just go back to your previous position.
Originally Posted by TonyWilliams
(This is the logical answer to upgrades, also. But, as has been pointed out, probably half the captains at SkyWest disagree. And, as is the case with SAPA, I believe any union would be largely... well, almost exclusively run by captains. Doesn't matter if 75% of the bargaining unit is all over this. They don't negotiate the contracts.
Originally Posted by rickair7777
SKW does not fire people lightly, that is a well known fact. If you don't work there you don't really have the slightest clue about how things work.
In TW's case there was likely more than meets the eye, and none of us here know the full story, perhaps not even TW.
Pilots who get fired at SKW almost invariably did one of these things:
- Show up drunk
- Fail a drug test
- Lie
- Commit repeated safety violations (one of which involves the NTSB).
- Aggressively and REPEATEDLY P/O other people, including manangers.
- Fail new-hire training.
In TW's case there was likely more than meets the eye, and none of us here know the full story, perhaps not even TW.
Pilots who get fired at SKW almost invariably did one of these things:
- Show up drunk
- Fail a drug test
- Lie
- Commit repeated safety violations (one of which involves the NTSB).
- Aggressively and REPEATEDLY P/O other people, including manangers.
- Fail new-hire training.
I think all airlines have pilots that get fired for the things you mentioned. Those are pretty cut and dry and nothing will stop a company from firing those people. But its for the grey areas or things that happen because of extenuating circumstances or simply because life happens. There needs to be a way of pleaing your case of innocence until proven otherwise.
Originally Posted by rickair7777
It is common knowledge that people do not just have a bad day and fail upgrade training...there are always underlying issues, such as attitude. If you bust a ride and have a good attitude, they work with you.
But you never hear "he was a great guy, but he failed upgrade and got fired". It usually does not come as a surprise...
Again TW's situation seems unusual and I don't know the answer, nor do I believe in up-or-out. If there is a wild-card in the process, it would be personality conflicts.
But you never hear "he was a great guy, but he failed upgrade and got fired". It usually does not come as a surprise...
Again TW's situation seems unusual and I don't know the answer, nor do I believe in up-or-out. If there is a wild-card in the process, it would be personality conflicts.
Originally Posted by TonyWilliams
The other thing that was brought to my attention that I didn't initially realize is that there is no review for an upgrade failure termination. If I'm accused of sexual harassment, or whatever, I get the option of a review.
Originally Posted by TonyWilliams
This goes off on the union tangent..... SkW does have an employee handbook. I believe there is also a company policy manual and a crew members policy manual. Items in the latter are negotiated and approved with voted in pilot representatives in SAPA. They aren't changed "willy nilly".
I'll repeat the point I've made a few times regarding the rule at SkW. The folks who currently run the pilot organization, and I believe any future possible labor union, do not support a change to the up-n-out rule.
There's no magic there.
As to issues with my training regarding the policy manual, or established practice; they would have to be handled by legal counsel that I would retain. If it were a union shop, that union MAY elect to pursue this. There is no guarantee there, either.
But, like insurance, generally the union will take all the risk for costs associated with your case.
I'll repeat the point I've made a few times regarding the rule at SkW. The folks who currently run the pilot organization, and I believe any future possible labor union, do not support a change to the up-n-out rule.
There's no magic there.
As to issues with my training regarding the policy manual, or established practice; they would have to be handled by legal counsel that I would retain. If it were a union shop, that union MAY elect to pursue this. There is no guarantee there, either.
But, like insurance, generally the union will take all the risk for costs associated with your case.
With a union shop, or at least ALPA, you would always get to greive this. And you would also be able to appeal the greivance as well. As for taking it the last step of arbitration, that would be up to the MEC to decide. I can tell you that at XJT, the MEC was prepared to take a verbal warning (the lowest level of discipline that doesn't even go in your file) to arbitration. The MEC felt that what the company was doing was not fair in light of the circumstances. Many of these things have precedence issues attached to them as well so that you only have make the issue once.
Originally Posted by rickair7777
Most large companies don't try to play these games, too much money to lose. But pilots, especially at the entry level, are notoriously inexperienced and afraid to make waves. Some of this is for good reason...leaving an employer under contentious circumstances may hurt your future job prospects in this industry.
10-30-2008, 10:18 PM
#165
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: Self employed
Posts: 3,048
Originally Posted by Nevets
Even if what you say is true, the last defense is always with the vote of the rank and file. If there was a union there, the representatives would be voted in by the rank and file. The rank and file could vote anyone in with the issues that they feel are important to them. If this is a policy they feel is important, they can vote for those who agree with them on it....... The power lies with the rank and file.
The rank and file currently has the ability to vote in reps who either support, or not, this issue. So far, the 18-ish reps that have been voted in by the pilots overwhelmingly support the current policy.
Why would anybody think the situation would change with a different pilot group structure? If only reps were voted in who support changing the policy, if would take years to get a majority. Then you have to sell it to the company, whether you're a union or not. Remember, there is reportedly at least one UNION airline (AA) that also has this policy.
Don't get me wrong. I see a need for a union, but a union does not automatically fix this.... ever. A union doesn't automatically take your issue to court. Saying that some union would go the extra mile to fix your issue is a bit like thinking that the company will also go the extra mile. It might happen; it might not.
Certainly, I can see some changes even with the current policy with the current reps. No where that I know of does it say you must be banned for life from SkyWest. Why not let me reapply?
The latest number that I got for pilot firing at SkyWest is 32. Didn't get the time frame (I think this year), but that's a bunch of fired pilots. I guess I'm one, and the crew who did the negative G's are two more. A few days after I was fired, I got a call from an EMB FO who was fired on IOE. Also, I got a call tonight from a pilot who was fired from SkW a few years ago. Interesting story.
Maybe I should start a club? STOOP: Skywest Terminated Organization Of Pilots?
10-31-2008, 08:25 AM
#166
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: DD->DH->RU/XE soon to be EV
Posts: 3,732
Originally Posted by TonyWilliams
and the crew who did the negative G's are two more.
10-31-2008, 08:30 AM
#167
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: EMB 145 CPT
Posts: 2,934
Originally Posted by TonyWilliams
The rank and file currently has the ability to vote in reps who either support, or not, this issue. So far, the 18-ish reps that have been voted in by the pilots overwhelmingly support the current policy.
Why would anybody think the situation would change with a different pilot group structure? If only reps were voted in who support changing the policy, if would take years to get a majority. Then you have to sell it to the company, whether you're a union or not. Remember, there is reportedly at least one UNION airline (AA) that also has this policy.
Don't get me wrong. I see a need for a union, but a union does not automatically fix this.... ever. A union doesn't automatically take your issue to court. Saying that some union would go the extra mile to fix your issue is a bit like thinking that the company will also go the extra mile. It might happen; it might not.
Certainly, I can see some changes even with the current policy with the current reps. No where that I know of does it say you must be banned for life from SkyWest. Why not let me reapply?
The latest number that I got for pilot firing at SkyWest is 32. Didn't get the time frame (I think this year), but that's a bunch of fired pilots. I guess I'm one, and the crew who did the negative G's are two more. A few days after I was fired, I got a call from an EMB FO who was fired on IOE. Also, I got a call tonight from a pilot who was fired from SkW a few years ago. Interesting story.
Maybe I should start a club? STOOP: Skywest Terminated Organization Of Pilots?
Why would anybody think the situation would change with a different pilot group structure? If only reps were voted in who support changing the policy, if would take years to get a majority. Then you have to sell it to the company, whether you're a union or not. Remember, there is reportedly at least one UNION airline (AA) that also has this policy.
Don't get me wrong. I see a need for a union, but a union does not automatically fix this.... ever. A union doesn't automatically take your issue to court. Saying that some union would go the extra mile to fix your issue is a bit like thinking that the company will also go the extra mile. It might happen; it might not.
Certainly, I can see some changes even with the current policy with the current reps. No where that I know of does it say you must be banned for life from SkyWest. Why not let me reapply?
The latest number that I got for pilot firing at SkyWest is 32. Didn't get the time frame (I think this year), but that's a bunch of fired pilots. I guess I'm one, and the crew who did the negative G's are two more. A few days after I was fired, I got a call from an EMB FO who was fired on IOE. Also, I got a call tonight from a pilot who was fired from SkW a few years ago. Interesting story.
Maybe I should start a club? STOOP: Skywest Terminated Organization Of Pilots?
As for the firings, this was another thing I would ask people during the Skywest ALPA drive. We were given some number as well and if I remember correctly it was around the same amount as you said but for the previous year, obviously. And I would tell them that these were just the ones we know about. Like I said, comopanies don't air their dirty laundry. Even where I work, I don't know the actual number of people that get fired each year unless I actually call my MEC chairman and ask him directly.
The point is that there may have been a few people that may have not deserved to be fired. There are always those who porpusely comprimise safety and they desereve what they get but if only ONE of those 32 was fired unjustly, then its a tragedy. That is why there needs to be a mechanism to keep everyone on the up and up.
This just doesn't resonate with pilots there even though there was a real life actual example of it with DD happening at that very time. They just seem to think that its one or two issolated cases and that it wont happen to them. Maybe it wont happen to them but it shouldn't happen to anyone. But again, that didn't really matter to them. To each his own I guess.
Good luck
10-31-2008, 08:55 AM
#168
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: Self employed
Posts: 3,048
Originally Posted by dojetdriver
I heard something like this from a SKW JS'er one time. Just curious, was it the FOQA that alerted the company as to what happened, or was there another reporting source?
The IDG's came off line, 'cuz they lost oil pressure... 'cuz the oil was floating!
Maintenance looked at the data, and saw that the plane had pulled neg 0.7g's.
Fired the captain, who initiated the ordeal, and fired the FO who was on probation. The CP in MKE mentioned to the guy that if we weren't overstaffed, you might not get fired.....
10-31-2008, 09:08 AM
#169
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: 757/767
Posts: 890
Originally Posted by TonyWilliams
The IDG's came off line, 'cuz they lost oil pressure... 'cuz the oil was floating!
Maintenance looked at the data, and saw that the plane had pulled neg 0.7g's.
Fired the captain, who initiated the ordeal, and fired the FO who was on probation. The CP in MKE mentioned to the guy that if we weren't overstaffed, you might not get fired.....
Maintenance looked at the data, and saw that the plane had pulled neg 0.7g's.
Fired the captain, who initiated the ordeal, and fired the FO who was on probation. The CP in MKE mentioned to the guy that if we weren't overstaffed, you might not get fired.....
10-31-2008, 09:12 AM
#170
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: Self employed
Posts: 3,048
Just heard that SkW is going to run the next upgrade class in Jan. Good luck to those who step up, but make sure you have a solid plan B.
I want to make it clear that if you, like me, are not successful, you WILL NOT find another part 121 air carrier job in the USA. Not with thousands of guys on the street who don't have FAA pink slips for failure, fired from an airline, and a PRIA record. You won't even get an interview in the USA.
SkyWest won't offer you a job throwing bags. Or taking out the trash.
Have that plan B. It can happen, it does happen.
I want to make it clear that if you, like me, are not successful, you WILL NOT find another part 121 air carrier job in the USA. Not with thousands of guys on the street who don't have FAA pink slips for failure, fired from an airline, and a PRIA record. You won't even get an interview in the USA.
SkyWest won't offer you a job throwing bags. Or taking out the trash.
Have that plan B. It can happen, it does happen.
