FedEx-disputed pairings
03-29-2009, 09:21 PM
#71
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: 11 Capt
Posts: 509
I disagree. As ridiculous as it seems, they are not doing anything that the CBA does not allow. ALPA legal is right on the money. There may be the potential for legal action (creating a hostile workplace, etc.) of some kind if the association starts publishing the names of people that are doing things that the contract currently allows.
What's next? Carryover flyers? Vacation sell-backs? Where does it end? I'm assuming it is when the vocal minority decides.
What's next? Carryover flyers? Vacation sell-backs? Where does it end? I'm assuming it is when the vocal minority decides.
03-30-2009, 08:23 AM
#72
Line Holder
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 83
Bingo. Again, disputed pairings identify weak or exploitable areas of our current agreement. From the SIG page on alpa.org:
The PSIT takes the issue of pairing disputes very seriously. Pairings are not disputed because the PSIT considers them to be merely “inconvenient.” A pairing will be disputed when identified by the FEDEX MEC as having been constructed with unsafe, onerous, or otherwise objectionable flying. The reasons for the dispute are often accompanied with their identification. The contractual procedures and handling of pairing disputes is outlined in Section 25.BB. of the Contract.
An excerpt from this Section is: “Additionally, if on a recurring basis, a pairing, disputed or not, appears in open time and is routinely avoided by pilots trip trading or eligible for make-up, OTP, etc., and therefore must be assigned to a reserve pilot, the above procedure shall apply.” The “above procedure” referenced by the excerpt, would refer the disputed pairing to the Scheduling Dispute Board for resolution. You can see that it is hoped that onerous flying would identify itself by it’s very nature and be avoided- therefore further identifying itself as in need of fixing.
As an important Contractual right: Disputed pairings should not be assigned to any crewmember but a Reserve pilot involuntarily. Except for specifically described extraordinary circumstances, Disputed Pairings will not be available in any bidpack lines and should absolutely not be assigned in CIC makeup, custom lines, or on any Secondary line without a specific request, by pairing number, from the crewmember. You will still see them in open time and in the bidpack pairing list only identified by pairing number. Please consider them carefully.
You can reference Disputed pairings and the nature of their dispute by subscribing to the Union e-mail list, or accessing the Union web-site. A copy of the monthly Scheduling Letter identifying disputes and discussing monthly changes is available both ways as well as a convenient and prominently displayed list on the main FedEx ALPA web page. Archives are available in the Scheduling section.
Disputed pairings are NOT “STRUCK WORK” and are available to any crewmember, but they can be avoided by any pilot other than a Reserve or Standby pilot. As a reminder, once open time is released, you can then get one of these disputed pairings by:
Voluntary: Requesting them by number in CIC make-up.
Voluntary: Specifically requesting a disputed pairing (by number) on a secondary or custom line.
Voluntary: Putting “volunteer for general trips” or “general make-up” in as a request in any make-up status and then being assigned a disputed pairing in open time.
Voluntary: Requesting a trip trade into a disputed pairing.
Voluntary: Accepting VLT/DRF into a disputed pairing.
Involuntary: Reserve-an option the Company always retains for the operation of any legally-constructed pairing. This assignment is involuntary and may not be turned down.
One more thing-adding deadheads to a disputed pairing and making it available to another domicile is a clever fix to a predicament from a crew scheduling point of view, but it may not contain a solution to what made the pairing disputable in the first place. Please compare new pairings to the original disputed pairing list to see if the pairing still contains the unsafe, onerous, or otherwise objectionable flying.
WHAT DOES IT MEAN WHEN THE PSIT “DISPUTES” A PAIRING?
The PSIT takes the issue of pairing disputes very seriously. Pairings are not disputed because the PSIT considers them to be merely “inconvenient.” A pairing will be disputed when identified by the FEDEX MEC as having been constructed with unsafe, onerous, or otherwise objectionable flying. The reasons for the dispute are often accompanied with their identification. The contractual procedures and handling of pairing disputes is outlined in Section 25.BB. of the Contract.
An excerpt from this Section is: “Additionally, if on a recurring basis, a pairing, disputed or not, appears in open time and is routinely avoided by pilots trip trading or eligible for make-up, OTP, etc., and therefore must be assigned to a reserve pilot, the above procedure shall apply.” The “above procedure” referenced by the excerpt, would refer the disputed pairing to the Scheduling Dispute Board for resolution. You can see that it is hoped that onerous flying would identify itself by it’s very nature and be avoided- therefore further identifying itself as in need of fixing.
As an important Contractual right: Disputed pairings should not be assigned to any crewmember but a Reserve pilot involuntarily. Except for specifically described extraordinary circumstances, Disputed Pairings will not be available in any bidpack lines and should absolutely not be assigned in CIC makeup, custom lines, or on any Secondary line without a specific request, by pairing number, from the crewmember. You will still see them in open time and in the bidpack pairing list only identified by pairing number. Please consider them carefully.
You can reference Disputed pairings and the nature of their dispute by subscribing to the Union e-mail list, or accessing the Union web-site. A copy of the monthly Scheduling Letter identifying disputes and discussing monthly changes is available both ways as well as a convenient and prominently displayed list on the main FedEx ALPA web page. Archives are available in the Scheduling section.
Disputed pairings are NOT “STRUCK WORK” and are available to any crewmember, but they can be avoided by any pilot other than a Reserve or Standby pilot. As a reminder, once open time is released, you can then get one of these disputed pairings by:
Voluntary: Requesting them by number in CIC make-up.
Voluntary: Specifically requesting a disputed pairing (by number) on a secondary or custom line.
Voluntary: Putting “volunteer for general trips” or “general make-up” in as a request in any make-up status and then being assigned a disputed pairing in open time.
Voluntary: Requesting a trip trade into a disputed pairing.
Voluntary: Accepting VLT/DRF into a disputed pairing.
Involuntary: Reserve-an option the Company always retains for the operation of any legally-constructed pairing. This assignment is involuntary and may not be turned down.
One more thing-adding deadheads to a disputed pairing and making it available to another domicile is a clever fix to a predicament from a crew scheduling point of view, but it may not contain a solution to what made the pairing disputable in the first place. Please compare new pairings to the original disputed pairing list to see if the pairing still contains the unsafe, onerous, or otherwise objectionable flying.
03-30-2009, 08:46 AM
#73
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: Row well and live...
Posts: 494
Justify it all you want, but if you were one of folks looking at getting kicked to the curb by a company still showing a Billion dollars + in net profit, you might see it differently.
Oh...maybe the MEC should send you an audio book of the contract, since actually reading it seems so difficult.
03-30-2009, 08:30 PM
#74
Line Holder
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 83
Which is why when you fly one, "Open Mind", you are literally taking food out of the mouths of the exact people you work with. Min layovers, adding another leg whenever it will squeeze within a minute, and the optimizer rotates another half-turn each month, like clockwork. The SIG/PSIT is still locked out, so DP's are decided by mgmt and the lines are currently built by the company.
Justify it all you want, but if you were one of folks looking at getting kicked to the curb by a company still showing a Billion dollars + in net profit, you might see it differently.
Oh...maybe the MEC should send you an audio book of the contract, since actually reading it seems so difficult.
Justify it all you want, but if you were one of folks looking at getting kicked to the curb by a company still showing a Billion dollars + in net profit, you might see it differently.
Oh...maybe the MEC should send you an audio book of the contract, since actually reading it seems so difficult.
03-30-2009, 08:48 PM
#75
Ok, No more sleeping Dog
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: MD-11, F/O
Posts: 889
Anyone willing to actually read my post will see that I haven't tried to justify anything. It is a discussion of the Sig sect most quoted... incorrectly in my opinion. I welcome other thoughts on this sect and how I may be misreading it. Its amazing that this poster offers me an audio book when I am the advocate of everyone reading the CBA and contributing their opinion. I have to wonder if CMA#### prefers an uninformed membership so he can spread his own misinformation.
03-31-2009, 12:03 AM
#80
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: 777 FO
Posts: 931
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
