Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > Spirit
SPA union doesn’t care about seniority >

SPA union doesn’t care about seniority

Notices

SPA union doesn’t care about seniority

Old 08-16-2019, 05:47 PM
  #21  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Omniscient's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2019
Posts: 813
Default

Originally Posted by Qotsaautopilot View Post
The company can withhold an additional 3% of scheduled flying for IOE/OE 25.B.1. It doesn’t say what type of trips.

So I’ll ask again. Is the flying not being withheld before the navblue pbs bid and your trips are being denied in your bid because they are going to training, or do the trips not exist in the navblue pairing packet because they were withheld for training?

If they were withheld prior to navblue it’s completely legal per the contract and is not new. The company can withhold whatever 5% and another 3% of flying for IOE/OE that they want. This is so that the check airman don’t bid regular lines and then the company has to buy the FO off everyone of their trips. Sure would be nice but that is something we never had here at Spirit at least since I’ve been here.

If you want to stipulate what type of flying the company can withhold in their 5+3% withholding then we need to negotiate that because it’s certainly not in the language now.

I feel the pain and I’ve always thought check airmen should bid in the regular bid and FOs get bought off to add the pilot doing IOE/OE. Put that in the bucket of priorities that’s filling up quick. I’m all for complaining but you sound like you are complaining about something happening that isn’t legal which to my knowledge isn’t the case but I could be wrong.
MEC will meet with the training department management to find a solution to help respect seniority while getting their trips covered. So it’s being followed up with; MEC passed a resolution on it. No reason to just wait until next go around
Omniscient is offline  
Old 08-17-2019, 05:29 AM
  #22  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: 7th green
Posts: 4,378
Default

Originally Posted by Freightcowboy View Post
This is exactly why ALPA members being in the training department is a bad idea.
Not a Spirit guy and reading the thread you seem to have a valid gripe. My question is if you ban ALPA members from the training department, who are you going to get to do it? Contractors?

It seems (and I don't know your contract) that if your MEC would just enforce the language you wouldn't have or need to make such a draconian suggestion. By the way, using IPs and Management pilots as "super reserves" isn't right either.

Working training is a two edged sword. It has its benefits but it also keeps you away from what you dreamed of as a kid...flying the jet.
Packrat is offline  
Old 08-17-2019, 05:34 AM
  #23  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,603
Default

Originally Posted by Packrat View Post
Not a Spirit guy and reading the thread you seem to have a valid gripe. My question is if you ban ALPA members from the training department, who are you going to get to do it? Contractors?

It seems (and I don't know your contract) that if your MEC would just enforce the language you wouldn't have or need to make such a draconian suggestion. By the way, using IPs and Management pilots as "super reserves" isn't right either.

Working training is a two edged sword. It has its benefits but it also keeps you away from what you dreamed of as a kid...flying the jet.
I think he means MEC officers and LEC status reps and not ALPA members at large because we are obviously all ALPA members. I read it the same why as you though. Folks like this forget WE ARE ALPA and refer to “the union” when WE ARE THE UNION.
Qotsaautopilot is offline  
Old 08-17-2019, 05:45 AM
  #24  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Omniscient's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2019
Posts: 813
Default

Originally Posted by Packrat View Post
Not a Spirit guy and reading the thread you seem to have a valid gripe. My question is if you ban ALPA members from the training department, who are you going to get to do it? Contractors?

It seems (and I don't know your contract) that if your MEC would just enforce the language you wouldn't have or need to make such a draconian suggestion. By the way, using IPs and Management pilots as "super reserves" isn't right either.

Working training is a two edged sword. It has its benefits but it also keeps you away from what you dreamed of as a kid...flying the jet.
I think a poor choice of wording was used by Freight Cowboy; “ALPA Members as instructors.” Every pilot on the seniority list is a member of ALPA, even our scab. The idea we should outsource training to non seniority list pilots is probably the worst idea around and already tried by our old Swedish buddy, who wanted to have non seniority list pilots able to give all training and checking. So unless we want a Riddle kid giving you your next line check or PC, it’s a stupid stupid idea that we have contractual language to protect.

If he is referring to having ALPA volunteers serving as instructors, thats another thing. Any rule which would limit/prohibit a good volunteer from joining an ALPA committee, to serve pilots on their off time, just because they were an instructor, is silly. The inverse is true as well; ALPA volunteers are pro pilot; having a motivated pro pilot guy in training is a great thing.

The solution to this isn’t complex and it appears already to be in the works. It’s clear the training department was pulling trips for training that the check airman wanted to be pulled. Having management pull the trips the guys wanted isn’t a bad thing, it’s a good thing they work with the instructors, lets just call it misguided.

All sides seem to be open to finding a solution that’s, “fair,” and respects line seniority. So I’m willing to wait and see what they come up with. But let’s not get it confused, having ALPA volunteers in our training department is a great thing and only helps the influence this pilot group can have in our training and checking
Omniscient is offline  
Old 08-17-2019, 06:28 AM
  #25  
Line Holder
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Position: CA: A321/A320/A319
Posts: 96
Default

Yes poor wording on my part, MEC and LEC members being in the training department is a bad idea!!
Freightcowboy is offline  
Old 08-17-2019, 06:35 AM
  #26  
Line Holder
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Position: CA: A321/A320/A319
Posts: 96
Default

Originally Posted by Qotsaautopilot View Post
The company can withhold an additional 3% of scheduled flying for IOE/OE 25.B.1. It doesn’t say what type of trips.

So I’ll ask again. Is the flying not being withheld before the navblue pbs bid and your trips are being denied in your bid because they are going to training, or do the trips not exist in the navblue pairing packet because they were withheld for training?

If they were withheld prior to navblue it’s completely legal per the contract and is not new. The company can withhold whatever 5% and another 3% of flying for IOE/OE that they want. This is so that the check airman don’t bid regular lines and then the company has to buy the FO off everyone of their trips. Sure would be nice but that is something we never had here at Spirit at least since I’ve been here.

If you want to stipulate what type of flying the company can withhold in their 5+3% withholding then we need to negotiate that because it’s certainly not in the language now.

I feel the pain and I’ve always thought check airmen should bid in the regular bid and FOs get bought off to add the pilot doing IOE/OE. Put that in the bucket of priorities that’s filling up quick. I’m all for complaining but you sound like you are complaining about something happening that isn’t legal which to my knowledge isn’t the case but I could be wrong.
Have you read the section I pointed out earlier??? Yes I understand up to 8 percent total trips, after talking to the 77 CA REP, he has in writing about check airmen basically telling the training scheduler what trips they want to work.. I will say it again the check airmen are telling the training scheduler what trips they want to work.

The company isn’t randomly pulling the trips, they wait for the check airmen to tell them and that has been verified by again our 77 CA REP
Freightcowboy is offline  
Old 08-17-2019, 06:37 AM
  #27  
Line Holder
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Position: CA: A321/A320/A319
Posts: 96
Default

Originally Posted by gatorbird View Post
So maybe you should consider not speaking about things you know nothing about? Just a thought.

I speak of things that have been verified by our CA REP maybe you were left out in the wind??
Freightcowboy is offline  
Old 08-17-2019, 06:39 AM
  #28  
Line Holder
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Position: CA: A321/A320/A319
Posts: 96
Default

Originally Posted by gripngrab View Post
Why don't you run for MEC again then? Do us another bang up job like you did before.
Not a bad idea, only problem is I have never ran for a union position here
Freightcowboy is offline  
Old 08-17-2019, 06:58 AM
  #29  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,422
Default

Originally Posted by Freightcowboy View Post
Have you read the section I pointed out earlier??? Yes I understand up to 8 percent total trips, after talking to the 77 CA REP, he has in writing about check airmen basically telling the training scheduler what trips they want to work.. I will say it again the check airmen are telling the training scheduler what trips they want to work.

The company isn’t randomly pulling the trips, they wait for the check airmen to tell them and that has been verified by again our 77 CA REP
Somebody will always complain no matter the mix of trips. For those doing OE though, considering the override is so small and their schedule gets locked, I really have no problem with them cherry picking too much.

That said, all turns for a new student is a waste of time. They really should see a variety and experience as much of the operation as possible.
putzin is offline  
Old 08-17-2019, 07:41 AM
  #30  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,267
Default

Originally Posted by putzin View Post

That said, all turns for a new student is a waste of time. They really should see a variety and experience as much of the operation as possible.
This is true. I’d be pretty frustrated if I just had to do a handful of day trips.
Poser765 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
APC225
United
1
02-23-2019 05:16 AM
jsled
United
240
05-23-2017 07:24 PM
lovellrt
SkyWest
15181
02-25-2016 05:47 PM
Turbanpilot
American
1446
12-24-2014 05:31 PM
TruthHurts
United
57
03-22-2012 10:03 AM

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


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices