Puddytatt

23m7 use has gone down since pre-DH giving away the farm. But out of probably 60 potential 23m7 I have found in my ES, maybe 3 were listed.on the company report. Btw, that is REQUIRED by the previous grievance settlement. 4% complaince. Lovely.

Scheduling: "We will send it to the pay specialists." And nothing is done. ALPA is so backlogged they aren't to the change date yet. Supposedly they are going to regrieve the issue due to the company's lack of compliance with they agreement to list 23m7's.

Maybe once my name was added to the 23m7 report posthumously after I called scheduling. That is supposed to be done automatically BY THE COMPANY. Not when someone calls about it.

They WERE violating the contract. 23m7 required them to find and pay the appropriately harmed party. But DH gave away batch sizes for them to...... Wait for it.... Find and pay the appropriately harmed party... And write it on a report. They literally aren't doing either. There are just less A#1 so you think things are all hunky dory now.

DH literally signed away millions, if not tens of millions in contractually guaranteed penalties, that were actually being paid btw, all so the company would agree to do what they had already agreed to do via 23m7. And while 23m7 violations were bad for individuals by being missed, if done properly, they would have brought triple pay to the pilot group. The fact the company wasn't doing them properly, and now after we gave millions away for free, still idn't doing them properly, is just a sad statement on the current management mentality. But don't mistake us fixing two of their problem and saving them money on both sides of the issues for being good. We literally gave money away to give money away. DH and Co should have pressed hard on forcing them to actually follow 23m7. Being forced to comply with the pay implications the company agreed to abide by might have forced their own hand in to abiding by 23N/O. And if not, the pilot group would have reaped the pay benefits through 23m7 and 23Z1d.

notEnuf

This cannot be overstated and needs to be emphasized. While pay penalties are of little use in improving schedules, they are a huge incentive for arbitration. The financial liability they created for the company over a delayed grievance process would force better terms, awarded damages, or a real solution. The meter isn't running anymore and DH stopped it.

Hotel Kilo

So, what are the odds DH rolls in to a nice 4th floor management gig after his time as MEC Chairman? He really effd us over on batch sizes, 23m7, it's sad so many here can't see the harm. That should have been memrat. Not a DH unilateral sling.

Whoopsmybad

I talked to my rep asking why it didn’t go to MEMRAT, and I got a super wishy washy unconvincing answer.

Because they knew it would fail miserably is the answer.

20Fathoms

This^^^^

Whether you loved or hated this change, in terms of financial importance and use of negotiating capital this was a very very big item. Something of that significance should absolutely be voted on by the pilot group. They didn’t because they knew they would lose.

tripled

still can’t figure out why he did it. To create goodwill with a new admin? To fund the EDP rigs? To ‘honor seniority’? Ignorance? What was the benefit? It’s not like scheduling has become more agreeable to the pilot group since then. In fact, with the 48-hour pcs lockout one could argue things are worse.

crewdawg

Yup! This should have gone to memrat, but you don't send things to memrat that you know will fail...

Whoopsmybad

That was one of the answers I got, how with this it would be better for following seniority and eliminate 23M7. I talked to him about 2-3 weeks after, and not asked since to see if it really did everything they thought it would.

ancman

He’s either completely incompetent or malicious. Either way, it’s time for him to go.

RightSide

Question, I don’t swap much. If I want to drop a trip for two different trips do I put both trips on the same line under add? Or do I put the first trip on line 1 and the second trip on line 2? Thanks all.