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

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.

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

Yes poor wording on my part, MEC and LEC members being in the training department is a bad idea!!

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

I speak of things that have been verified by our CA REP maybe you were left out in the wind??

Not a bad idea, only problem is I have never ran for a union position here

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.

This is true. I’d be pretty frustrated if I just had to do a handful of day trips.