iarapilot

For those of you bidding an FDA, a little heads up. A grievance has been submitted to the Grievance Chairman concerning the Companies unilateral sweetening of the LOA, along with a letter from a crew member to DW about about the same subject. Reference this post...

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/sh...ad.php?t=18649

So, if this grievance goes thru and is won, and the MEC does not warn, ASAP, bidders of these FDA openings that the unilateral additions to the LOA my not be given, there might be some unhappy awardies.

I just thought everyone should know.

Gunter

Who's taking bets on how this will turn out.

Critical questions--


Was it DW's idea?

Is ALPA likely to be sued if they don't act on the filed grievance?



If the answers are no I don't think anything will change.

But I don't think the sweetening affects anything like grid penalties, VEBA or retro. So maybe the MEC will act.

Gunter

So let's say you get awarded the FDA. You have to sign the paperwork to go to training.

Can you demand all the "sweeteners" be offered to you in writing on the paperwork you sign?

What happens if you don't sign because the "sweeteners" go away or they refuse to put the "sweeteners" on the paperwork?

pdo bump

DW is much too busy pushing his over 60 change to worry about trivial things such as our FDAs or the decline of our bidpack.

2cylinderdriver

According to my Block Rep, the Union got nothing in advance on the FDA Deposit issue, other than a phone call prior to the release of the FCIF. This is a BIG deal and I know we have no reason to give the MEC any lattitude, but let's see what they do. This direct dealing has been going on in other areas of our Contract and it needs to come to a STOP.

Call or email your Reps and let them know how you feel about this.

FDXLAG

They already voted 11-1 to do nothing.

iarapilot

It was not DW's idea. It was filed by a individual crew member. And, if I am not mistaken, the filing of a grievance by an individual crew member is his/her right under the CBA. My guess is that the Union has a legal obligation to file it. If they dont, there might be trouble.

Falconjet

To be fair, that 11-1 vote was just the members of LEC 26 (including the block reps) who voted on the motion for the LEC to recommend that the MEC reject the company offer of rental assistance. That motion was rejected 11-1 in that meeting.

Unless you are talking about the LOA vote, in which case, nevermind.

FJ

iarapilot

My reason for this thread was to give a heads up on the ramifications of bidding for the FDA, given the circumstances. And, as I said earlier, if the MEC does not make these circumstances "public", and the grievance goes thru and is won, there might be some unhappy awardees.

I would say that the people that would go to training would have to have it in writing as a side letter or a new LOA or whatever. That is the reason for this grievance; no more direct dealing from the Company without our bargaining agent, ALPA, properly signing off on it.

Falconjet

I did this at the joint council meeting last week. I think they know pretty much how most of the rank and file feel about this.

My block rep's stated concern was that he was more worried about the poor young junior guy that bids the FDA will lose the $10K in assistance if we protest the direct dealing, and how THAT union member would have to forfeit an enhancement (even though Dave Webb said it wasn't a "substantial" enhancement) and they would have deprived him of a benefit.

The MEC wants to take the benefit now and try to have it incorporated into future deals (sound familiar?) for everybody.

Nevermind that this issue was discussed during the negotiations of the LOA (again according to Dave Webb) and rejected by the company. Its not like this was some shot in the dark out of nowhere. Why is the company negotiating during an open bid? Which also begs the question, why hasn't the MEC/NC provided the membership with the openers from the LOA negotiations?

Nevermind also, the greater good that would be served by having the company follow the Railway Labor Act and live up to the terms of the LOA that was negotiated, recommended (with assurances that it was as good as it would get) and ratified by the majority of the crew force. Apparently the MEC would rather trade that for a less than "substantial" enhancement for the poor, young junior guy/gal who wants to bid the FDA.

FJ