Airline Pilot Central Forums - IBT National overrules Local 357's NC

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Regional (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/)

- - IBT National overrules Local 357's NC (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/73383-ibt-national-overrules-local-357s-nc.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geardownflaps30 (Post 1364355)

Yes!! It is a violation of the FARs if this day off is your only day off in the past seven. You can not have a present responsibility to the company on a required day off.

When this was incorporated into the Comair bankruptcy concessionary contract it had to be corrected by the FAA stepping in after numerous ASAP reports. You DO NOT want this verbiage in your contract no matter how simple it may seem to make a call or check in on line at first glance.

Remember to learn from the mistakes of those that preceded you. There are many many good reasons this LBFO was rejected by the NC. Believe it or not, they know what they are doing...protecting YOUR interests and desires.

Many companies have u check on your day off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karma (Post 1363956)

I had a lot of FO's call me up and tell me they are going to vote yes so they can get a $5 raise. I'm telling them to vote no but they think it will be several years before anything better is presented or years before released for a strike. One FO who is very junior told me it could cost her $30,000 over the years if there are too many no votes since she feels a better contract wouldn't be in place in the next 4-5 years if this is turned down. She has been telling CA's to not screw her over and no vote because they won't get a better offer for years. After this offer is voted out then negotiations start over from scratch I believe, somebody has been paid off.

Karma, are you a CA or FO?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saabs (Post 1365254)

Many companies have u check on your day off.

Colgan did but if there was nothing on your schedule, you were released the next day and that was for long call only. We are talking about short call and long call. Also, the long call requires you to check the day prior and to be available from 0430-1930 the day of.

By the way, anytime you checked your schedule the day prior on long call at Colgan or Pinnacle and you didn't have 24 off in 7, you violated FARs. It probably never happened though because honestly Colgan treated us better.

Another section that will be a big QOL change will be we will now be scheduled for Airport Standby (Reserve). If you didn't notice they dropped the requirement for them to let us go home to get a bag packed for an overnight and: "A Reserve Pilot on Airport Standby may be required to fly a trip that remains overnight and should be prepared to work as many reserve days as are left in his current sequence."

The reason we don't sit airport reserve is because they would have to let us go home first for anything other than a round trip so they just stick with the 1.5 hour callout. I for one am not willing to start sitting Airport Reserve unless they gave us something huge in return and not this concessionary piece of crap.

Is there a copy of the lbfo online somewhere?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DL31082 (Post 1365243)

In the FARs it states that you have to have 24hours off every 7 days. Off has been interpreted by the FAA as free from any obligation to the company.

FAR 121 differentiates between "rest period" and "free of duty". I'm guessing that you can't find an interpretation that says "duty" includes making a phone call or going online.

http://www.nata.aero/data/files/abj/...ations_abj.pdf

This LBFO is a huge win for the company! It's concessionary in every way! It's a self-serving heap of gains for the company. They will garner many first year FO votes based on the fact that these guys have had a boot on their head since day one.

I wouldn't vote yes to the union's proposal based on the severe givebacks in the rsv language. 66 months after cba 2002 became amendable and this is where the union is. Unbelievable.

By the way, for all of you who still just keep answering your phone on your days off, and during rsv assignments, line assignments etc... Notice the premium the co puts on your niceness in their LBFO sandwich! Stop prostituting yourself out to these pimps! Show a little self-respect and decline some phone calls and ACARS messages. You have proven their theory that if you allow contact with them, they can get by on shoe-lace staffing levels. Way to go guys!

And why are our performance numbers some of the best in the CPA industry? Who's still bending over for on-time performance for this place?

Love the signing bonus! $3100 per pilot before taxes! 2g after taxes. What a joke.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karma (Post 1363956)

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. If you think you have a fair chance of being gone before you'll make up the difference by waiting for something better, a Yes vote may make sense if you're only voting for yourself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FAULTPUSH (Post 1365324)

Where in my post did I ever duty? I said obligation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FAULTPUSH (Post 1365377)

I think that is horrible advice. The whole reason our FOs are topped out at 36.62 on a four year payscale is because in 2003, our pilots thought exactly like you're suggesting. No one thought upgrades would be more than two years. The short term took precedence over the long term. Not just in pay, but in RSV rules. That mentality screwed over much of our pilot group.

I'm a relatively senior FO and I will probably upgrade within a year. The new FO payrates will not effect me very much. I and hopefully most of our pilots will not sell our future co-workers down the river for a short term gain.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ATCsaidDoWhat (Post 1364001)

Look who's back! The AirTran troll! Who knows nothing about the Airline Division but what his ALPA handlers told him to say. How'd that work out for ya over there? I hear a bunch of your guys are suing ALPA over DFR when you and the boys screwed them on seniority. What was the deal again? Let SWA screw your guys in hopes that sucking up would get SWAPA to join ALPA?

How's that working out? Lessee...
UAL Senior pilots vs. ALPA - ALPA lost
UAL Junior pilots vs. ALPA- looking pretty bad, same charges as the seniors
TWA vs. ALPA - ALPA lost, looks like that'll be about $1.5 billion plus
AirTran vs. ALPA- ???

Maybe you'd be better off not listening to your handlers. So far their track record is pretty poor.

Seems the IBT Airline Division is run from the bottom up...by pilots who control their own destiny. They get a chance to vote a deal up or down. Unlike ALPA who will refuse to let you vote and then cram a deal down your throat and then have their lawyers and Jalmer Johnson tell you to ratify the deal or they cut off your funding. (Another difference...IBT pilot groups KEEP the bulk of their money, as opposed to ALPA who demands you send it ALL to them).

You know PCL...like you guys did to your pilots. And now you have a DFR!

If the IBT is so good for pilots, why did we boot their ass from Netjets and start an in-house union? Simple. Because there is little return on investment for a pilot from this group. This verbiage you guys are discussing further cements my thoughts on the IBT. What's to stop any company from calling any offer in negotiations their "LBFO" and the union forcing a vote?

Absolutely freakin stupid having this rule apply under the RLA. It's a DFR suit waiting to happen, but not a winnable one. You may have good local negotiators, but their hands were just tied by national. Best of luck....