I get it, but you can't just say 13 lines of flying, what about the reserve coverage for those lines, you have to go by what the airplanes provide them and crew to airplane ratio.

they don't carry enough reserves anyways. They probably wouldn't add any for 13 lines of flying.

[QUOTE=PastV1by10;2626483]Boiler, it actually would be a bit more than that if we take into consideration what the 7 airplanes on property gives them. International airplanes are staffed at 10 CPT's per airplane and 13 F/O's per plane. 7 planes would equate to 70+91= 161 Bodies on property, using your average of 300K you are talking north of 48 mil a year. So yes this 230 dollars a pay period is weak. UPS got off easy and now they will find another way of tightening the screws or another way of circumventing our CBA because it saves them money. Smart on their part.[/QUOTE

Your argument is not applicable in this case. Are Western Global and Air 21 (whatever the 767 subcontractor is called) being used Internationally? Perhaps your analysis would be more accurate if you used domestic staffing in your equation.

They did before we voted this POS of a contract in. Ask the union what the total number of reserve lines were prior to voting this thing in vs now. Doubt those numbers are forthcoming anytime soon.

[QUOTE=package puppy;2626671]I thought it was international flying, either way it lowers the number by about 10 mil a year but still not the 230 a PP. Guess it’s better than TLV pay, we got that going for us.

Without OCV, most assuredly the reserve lines would be higher right now. OCV coupled with unplanned UPS growth has caused UPS to be short staffed.
Article 13.1.B.1, didn't change in this latest contract "Minimum reserve staffing by status and equipment in each domicile will be at
least ten percent (10%), rounded to the next higher whole number."

UPS does carry this minimum of Reserves to scheduled lines. When UPS had excess pilots, they carried extra reserves (up to 22%) for years. When they are short pilots, they only have contractual reserves. Its not a mystery UPS is very short of pilots. So less reserve lines. How is this "current"IPA fault? Hasn't changed since the first contract. So are you blaming the first contract voters? IPA attempted to raise to 20% in this past negotiation. OCV certainly contributed as mentioned to shortfalls of available pilots, thus contractual reserve staffing and no more (pilots not around anyway yet).
Some argue that means more JA money to those inclined and this a better deal for some. Some fleets and seats reserves are not used all that much while a few others are working every or most every day.
You assign blame to the union when all airlines unions are handicapped by advantages provided to corporations explicitly by the RLA. The Arbitrator sets the verdict. IPA can and does ask for far more, however, the law doesn't provide for damages, just costs.
IPA could have asked for only MD crews and 75/76 crews to receive the payout and it would have been more substantial (just like those who bid the recovery lines on reserve). However, the choice was to allow all IPA pilots to receive a share of the awarded cost of doing the business according to the Arbitrator decision. I'm guessing some senior MD and 75/76 crews would have been OK with the few take the pie option. Alas, 2700+ IPA pilots will share the award. Certainly makes it less, but blame RLA and Arbitration for final verdict shortfalls.

So your saying the contract in it’s current form didn’t provide any consessions to reduce the number of reserve lines? The shiftable and reserve extensions didn’t provide any flexibility to the company to be able to reduce the 22% number? Come on man even the average line slug getting abused can see that.

You’re

Its

grammarly.com perhaps, if basic grammar is too tough?

I just quickly flipped through a couple of bid packages, doesn’t look like they are skimping on reserve lines. What evidence do you have to present to support your case?

I'm not trying to support anyone's case, but at least on my fleet the only reserve shifts currently available are RSVB or RSVA. No longer have any RSVD lines and no longer have an early HSBY.

Maybe that's not skimping, ;) but it's a shift choice no longer available to bid. Its not a stretch to assume they don't need that coverage any more due to the shift-able reserves and extension language. Its also not a stretch to assume they wouldn't have the bodies for it anyway.

:D

[QUOTE=PastV1by10;2626693]
When does the DUB/SHN payment start?