This has been discussed in other threads, but I think it deserves its own. The potential sick leave revision is a massive concession.

Here's my scenario: Some years ago, I sprained my ankle and called in sick for a long international trip. I was not able to to WS/GS after I called in well due to trip construction issues.

A couple of months later, my wife and little son were completely laid out with the flu. We had to take him to the hospital. I called in sick again because I was worried about him, and not fit to fly.

As I understand it, my second sick call would, under the proposed TA provisions, be subject to the company's demand for a doctor's note (I broke the magic "100 hours" harassment threshold on my 2nd sick call.

Some thoughts:

-Seems to me this harassment policy is geared to lowering sick time use by bullying guys who might not need to see a doctor themselves, but have family issues, etc. which render them unfit for duty (i.e., SICK).

- Can I provide a doctor's note saying I was "mentally unfit" to fly?

- What if I can't or don't get a doctor's note? No pay? Subject to termination? Company-forced medical examination? All of the above? Sure would be nice to know.

- Why on earth would DALPA allow this????

Although my situation is probably not too common, it doesn't seem like a stretch for someone to be in a similar situation.

This policy is a huge concession. It's #4 on my "hell no" list. I'm fine keeping the current version.

I don't know if you went to the doctor for the ankle injury, but if you did and provided a note to the company (even though not required) it would not count as part of the 100-hours. The proposed language is below.

3.
Verification of sickness under Section 14 F. 2. is required when:
a.
a pilot has used more than 100 hours of unverified sick leave in a sick leave year, or a pilot has been absent on a single sick occurrence for 15 or more consecutive days.

As I understand it - Under the TA, if you had a doctors note for the first sick call (the sprain), it would not count twords the 100 hours since it would have been a verified sickness.

Not saying the proposed policy is good or bad, I'm just saying.....

ok, got it.

But I wouldn't need a doctor's note at all under the current contract. And if the company wants one, they have to pay for the doc. Under the proposed policy, I interpret that whenever they want a doctor's note, it's out of our pockets.

Also--what exactly did we get in return for conceding this policy?

Another thing, if you used all of your 240 (or 270) hours due to a broken leg for example, and you come back with 3 months left before the next "year" starts, you can actually borrow 50 hours from the future year's allottment, just to give you additional sick leave coverage for those remaining months, all at 100% pay.

It's a pretty easy fix. Get rid of the "verification" program. Use the old standard that has been grieved an is understood by both sides. Presto, problem solved. All it requires is the removal of one line in the agreement. Move on to next problem area in the TA.

Won't happen unless you ask.

They always pay if they ask for a doctor's note.

They can ALWAYS ask for a doctors note now, regardless of how much sick time you've used. And they'll still pay for it under the proposed TA.

No dog in this fight but I'd want to know:

If a doctors verification of injury/illness is required, is the expense to obtain such verification expendable?

And

Is a phrase similar to "did not meet standards under FAR part 67 on this day" acceptable on the medical verification?

My logic behind this is two fold. First, flight managers lack the credential to agree or disagree with the reason for taking sick leave, that is, they aren't doctors. Do pilots need a manger second guessing the reason for sick leave when Part 67 is very clear about "it's the pilots responsibility" to make that decision. Second, what is the chain of custody within the company for such a form, who has access, and what internal regulations cover the handling of the verification forms? HIPAA may or may not apply, but it's still a huge breach of my privacy to have to disclose a medical condition to my employer. That info is between me and my doctor.

My $.02

Management must reimburse any request for verification



Yes.