Had a similar situation occur to me last year under the prior contract.....however, verbiage is still the same in our new one

David, (senior alpa contract guru), maintains that it is a long standing accepted practice---from before our first contract----and that all FedEx pilots should know that they wouldn't get the 18 CH for a long sub window if they were still on a trip during their IAP......because, if they were on a trip the company's position is that since you never sat any portion of your IAP an IAP didn't exist. (and they use 25.3.f to justify this position----similar to the 30 min rule for reserve folks)

thus, if your trip blocks in 31 minutes prior to the end of your IAP.....you sat a part of it and get 18CH towards sub gurantee. block in one minute later, and you get nothing.

At least that's how it was in the old contract, now that we are using common language, the next guy it happens to should challenge it......because, when you read the words in the contract. the IAP period is a definition. no where in the contract does it say the IAP doesn't happen if you aren't available for any portion of it

Shouldn't the scheduler, when they call you after the 8 hour initial availability period, know whether or not the company is planning on giving you 18 hours of credit?? Why play games with the pilot as they ask you if want to accept another trip (i.e. remain eligible for substitution)?

In the previous scenario, if the 18 hour credit was not coming, would the OTP bank be 22 hours instead of 4 hours?? Is there any way at all of determining the status of the 18 credit (or no credit at all) before the ask you to remain eligible for substitution??


It's not a morale issue, but a trust/integrity issue. Why can't they tell you what their supervisor/secret scheduling book is telling them on this issue?

If anyone goes the route of saying, "Don't trust the scheduler and know your contract", tell me why I should avoid calling in sick when I want time off if I experience the scheduler trying to "get away with something" to save a few bucks? That's not how I operate, so I don't do that. But I also expect the schedulers to shoot straight if I ask a specific question about something as big as whether or not 18 hours of credit is coming or not. Is that too much to ask?

Because
1 - The union asked me not to
- David didn't think I had a case
- The Grievance Commitee Chair said I'd tie up a lot of union $ for a case that will likely be lost.
2 - I didn't realize at the time I could grieve it anyway, whether the union agrees with my case or not.

Most people I talk to said I should have grieved it anyway... probably right.

Gunter,

Should is not a legally binding term.

FedEx is run by the attorneys.

Being nice, collegial, friendly... all good, but when it comes to contract issues, the attorneys have decided these qualities don't matter.

I think the schedulers SHOULD give us fair warning when they give us the shaft, instead of trying to sell us something, or sugar coat it so we'll buy it. But they're not required to do that by the contract.

I think 99% of the pilots come into this company wanting to give the company everything they reasonably can to make FedEx succeed. Then something like this happens, and we find out that there's really no compassion, no PSP (People Service Profit) corporate culture any more, and it changes our perspective. After a year or two, 99% of us learn that, "Don't trust the scheduler and know your contract" is the only way to ensure you get paid each month.