They're just trying to bring us UAL and CAL guys together.

 

Seems to be working. So far.

 

If that is the entire message on the "status" of what is going that sure doesn't give you much and takes a lot out of context. See the CAL MEC Chairman's Update from Friday, September 7th below. The extra red text is mine only.

The union achieved a lot this week, with two very full days of meetings with management in Washington, D.C., under the supervision of the National Mediation Board (NMB). The meetings were the result of our request for assistance to board member Linda Puchala, to ensure that open items for the TA were quickly resolved. We began the meetings with a list of items generated from those items that were not resolved with the AIP and others that came up as language was created. I think it is important to say that it is expected and normal that as we convert the AIP to a TA, issues will come up that must be resolved. I am pleased that we were able to get through the entire list and that language writing can continue unabated. We also agreed to continue to use this process to solve any disputes that may come up in the future as the language writing process evolves. (Translation: All open items have been resolved to a basic framework and now the language writing still has to firm those parts up. In addition to solving the problems that came up via "differences" with the two sides, this process could be used again if more "differences" come up on sections that have not had language drafting yet completed. That's the way I read it. Progress made but there could be more bumps since the TA is not yet complete as far as language goes.)

It is important that we solve issues as they come up so that the TA can be completed and the ratification process can be started. It is even more important that the language be written properly so as to represent what was negotiated. No one wants the contract to become a grievance mill. To that end, while I have expressed to our negotiators the importance of getting the job done quickly, I have been even more adamant that the job must be done correctly and accurately. I am concerned that, for a slew of reasons ranging from over optimism to misinformation, pilot expectations for the timeline to a TA have been set unrealistically high. There was never a chance that the TA would be completed by Labor Day. The fact is that the TA could be completed in a few more weeks or, and I think this is equally as likely, it could be done sometime in October. The JNC and I will, of course, keep you updated on the progress. (I am generally an optimistic person, but when it comes to this contract I have never believed anything until I see it and certainly never expect that things will be finished quickly. For some reason many think this part was going to happen fast. For me, in no prior communication regarding the AIP conversion to TA was there any set/firm/hard timeline given, only a general idea of what a time-frame could look like with the caveat that issues could come up which alter it. So if management would just agree to our versions of all the sections the TA would be done quickly. If they wanted us to just agree to theirs, not-so-much. I see the same thing above: this could progress rapidly to a conclusion but if more hiccups occur along the way it could just as easily take until sometime in October to finish this up...or later if you just accept that there is no actual calendar. I'm not saying I don't want this done now, but realistically I'm not seeing any promise of a date to actually see a TA.)

I think it is important to remember that when we initially requested mediation assistance from the NMB in our negotiations, that step involved knowingly and voluntarily giving a measure of control over the process to the NMB. This has included control over things such as meeting dates, times and locations; topics to be addressed during negotiations; and the recent and much discussed limitations on information that can be provided to the MECs and the pilots (the gag order). For us as pilots, and for some more than others, handing over the yoke to the NMB was and continues to be an uncomfortable situation. We like to be in control. However, the role of the NMB in helping to bring us to this point – an agreement in principle and language writing progressing towards a TA – should not be undervalued or summarily dismissed. We have seen repeated instances where their assistance has made the difference in making progress or stagnating. This was quite evident in this week’s meetings. We will continue to use the full range of resources available to us from the NMB as we complete our path to a TA and ratification of a new joint collective bargaining agreement. Their involvement, although not without its detractors, has proven to be more beneficial than not. So, until we have completed the job at hand and have progressed beyond ratification of a joint collective bargaining agreement, we will, at times begrudgingly so, continue to let the process work under the direction of the NMB. This does not mean that we will stop expressing our views directly to the NMB – both Capt. Heppner and I have shown no reluctance to do so. We will continue to advocate for our pilots.

Right now, the NMB has said that picketing or public demonstrations regarding negotiations or the process we have committed to would be counterproductive and contrary to their gag order. So, for now, this means that informational picketing and other such activities or actions must be set aside in the interest of achieving the greater goal. I think it is our responsibility as union leaders to make those difficult decisions. When Ms. Puchala indicated that the picketing originally planned by the UAL MEC this week would be contrary to the gag order, the only logical decision available was reached and the picketing was pulled down. Our responsibility is delivering a contract to our pilots. That is the goal that I and your union leaders are focused on. Doing feel-good things or promoting events that threaten the support of the very agency that has helped us make progress and maintain or reestablish management’s focus would only be counterproductive.

The last item I want to address this week is management’s rework of their CCS message calling for a doctor’s note from pilots who call in sick. As we told you in July (July 22, 2012), under our contract, management can only require a pilot to provide a written statement from an accredited and licensed healthcare professional if they have reasonable cause to believe that an individual pilot has misused sick leave or the absence has occurred in conjunction with his or her vacation or a holiday period as defined in the CBA. This blanket requirement that each and every pilot who calls in sick provide a written statement to the Chief Pilot is not only insulting to the professionalism of our pilot group, but a clear violation of Section 14, Part 4 of our CBA.

The contract’s requirement to evaluate each individual’s sick call for a reasonable cause is clearly not met by unsubstantiated allegations regarding sick leave levels of the pilot group as a whole. Accordingly, there can be no requirement that you provide a statement, absent a direct and individual request from the Company. If you are asked to provide such a statement, please request the precise nature of the reasonable cause that made them believe that you have misused sick leave or that the absence has occurred in conjunction with a vacation period or holiday period. In addition, if you are required by management to obtain such a statement from a physician, please keep the receipt and submit it for reimbursement from the Company.

Please do not allow your feelings about this CCS message to interfere with your professionalism - whether by unnecessarily calling in sick or fatigued, or, when at work, changing your normal way of operating in the hopes that this will put pressure on the Company. Recognize management’s ethical failures for what they are, but do not be drawn in by their mistakes.

Have a good weekend and Fly Safe.

 

It was a blastmail from UAL local LAX 57. This is from Heppner this morning:

Message From the Chairman, Captain Jay Heppner

JNC Update

On Friday, under the auspices of the NMB, we resolved all open items left over from August 2 and those that cropped up during language writing. The items resolved were agreed to and written in detail so as to avoid any confusion in their interpretation between the parties while being worked into the JCBA. At this time, there are no unresolved or disputed items. The JNC Co-Chairs are returning to Chicago to continue our task of completing all language into a TA as quickly as possible. We will keep you apprised of our progress.



Going forward, we will maintain continuous communications with the NMB on the status of our language writing, and the NMB will be in Chicago the week of September 17. While we would like to set a specific date for completion of the TA, that is not an exact science. The JCBA will be over 600 pages, requiring rewrites of some sections. We acknowledge that the drafting and review of final language could continue into October.

 

Ya Right,, What a Joke,,

"Into October" I have to ask?? What Year???

Maybe you guy's should grant another TPA you might need it...

That JCBA could be do this weekend if there was any interest in getting this done They been working on it for 3 year's....

ALPA can really dish out a good line..The BS keep's getting deeper and deeper.....

 

Yes mvndc10...The BS keeps getting deeper and deeper...

 

You're right. That JCBA could be do. They been draggin they feet.


Interesting take on the progress. Thanks for your input.

 

I still don't know who is playing the Pilots more Management or ALPA.....

Some how I think it is ALPA....

What a Joke..

 

Yes mvndc10....What a Joke

 

Deleted........