Originally Posted by JamesBond

Within 8 hours.. yeah they pretty much did.

Originally Posted by OOfff

23.m.7 allows schedulers to deviate from the ladder. How did we “give away” that clause?

Originally Posted by Valar Morghulis

A more relevant question would be what boundaries would the arby choose from? I would assume we’d argue as small as possible and the company would argue as wide as possible.

What would the outcome be?

Remember what 23M covers. Don’t tell me what “feels” right or “it should be this”. Given past histories of arbys decisions, make a guess what would realistically happen.

The RJ case was supposed to be open and shut. The arby pulled something completely out of thin air to justify the company getting a pass.

Originally Posted by OOfff

23.m.7 allows schedulers to deviate from the ladder. How did we “give away” that clause?

Originally Posted by Gspeed

PWA 4.H.4. - Suit Up Pay:
4. A reserve pilot will receive a minimum of two hours pay, no credit; be released from duty and receive free of duty periods under Section 23 S. 11., if the pilot:
a. has not acknowledged the removal from a rotation, and
b. reports for duty (e.g., GS, IA) on an X-day.


PWA 23.S.11. Payback Days:
11. A reserve pilot who flies on an X-day due to an IA, GS, or reroute will be given nine hours free of duty upon their release at the completion of their rotation.
a. The pilot’s X-day(s) will begin immediately following such nine-hour period and will continue until they have received a period of 24 hours free of duty for each interrupted and remaining X-day in their scheduled X-day block.
b. If the remaining days in the bid period are insufficient to contain the X-day(s), the pilot will be granted an additional day(s) off under Section 23 S. 16.


It doesn't say anything about only applying to the first interrupted X-day; it says that the "payback day(s)" will be awarded in accordance with 23.S.11. which is what governs flying a normal reserve greenslip. This is new language in TA 19.....Or did we magically give this away recently like 23.M.7.?

Originally Posted by OOfff

stop trying to make Arby happen

Originally Posted by JamesBond

We 'allowed' essentially unrestricted use of it inside 8 hours. True, they are supposed to provide proof of who is going to be paid for the seniority list transgression, but it will become normal ops rather than the way it is supposed to work. I suspect many side deals will be made.

Originally Posted by Whoopsmybad

But they have the meats.

Originally Posted by Ar Pilot

I’m going to go out on a limb and say they wrote section 4 before they got to Section 23. 23.S.11 in C2016 is the section that referenced reporting for GS/IA on X-days and not flying. That section is now 23.S.13 in C2019. Crackshot attorneys missed some language and it’s probably errata.

Originally Posted by TED74

Not really sure what you’re saying here. What side deals? EVERY 23M7 use will now be documented instead of ZERO before. EVERY 23M7 use will cost the company 50% more instead of only the instances we catch ourselves through haphazard monitoring and dues-funded ALPA teams. If the company can now cover a trip inside 8 hours with unrestricted-batch ARCOS use and pay 200% (or less - e.g. reserve pilot reporting early for a trip over RES days), why would normal ops become covering a trip with 23M7 and paying 300%?

What they HAD was unrestricted use at ANY point. Although I wish we got something valuable for the agreement and it should have gone to MEMRAT, I think we’re in a better spot overall WRT 23M7, and we’re not stuck gambling with labor-unfriendly mediation/arbitration to define how to coverage will work.