23.M.7 Updated
07-28-2023, 05:14 PM
#251
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: 7ER B...whatever that means.
Posts: 3,982
Anyone else been getting a flood of Arcos calls followed just a couple mins later by an IA call for the same rotation? Has happened 3 times today with 2-5 mins between the Arcos call and then the IA call.
07-28-2023, 08:05 PM
#252
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2016
Posts: 2,558
07-29-2023, 05:43 PM
#254
Moderator
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,807
More of a reason I don't trust the companies promise on 23m7. Today a GS was awarded 28 hours out, to an OOBGS. Problem was, it was never sent in base. A pilot called scheduling to highlight it and they just wanted to send it to a pay specialist for 23m7. Scheduler didnt want to fix it because it had been awaeded. The pilot said they had until 2 hours prior to fix it and the scheduler argued with him when he asked for a supervisor. Supervisor finally agreed and fixed it. This is just one of two shady (illegal...) things done today just in my category. But hey, we got their word they'll only abuse 23m7 inside 8 hours, so we got that going for us...
07-30-2023, 05:32 AM
#255
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 321
More of a reason I don't trust the companies promise on 23m7. Today a GS was awarded 28 hours out, to an OOBGS. Problem was, it was never sent in base. A pilot called scheduling to highlight it and they just wanted to send it to a pay specialist for 23m7. Scheduler didnt want to fix it because it had been awaeded. The pilot said they had until 2 hours prior to fix it and the scheduler argued with him when he asked for a supervisor. Supervisor finally agreed and fixed it. This is just one of two shady (illegal...) things done today just in my category. But hey, we got their word they'll only abuse 23m7 inside 8 hours, so we got that going for us...
What you’re describing is a an award error or omission. The scheduler and/or supervisor were in error calling this an M7 use (a lot of things are called M7 that actually aren’t) and for them to do so actually jeopardizes the company’s settlement agreement. That phone call will be listened to by the scheduling committee, and I suspect this will be on the Company’s desk at 0800 Monday morning.
07-30-2023, 05:49 AM
#256
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2020
Posts: 379
More of a reason I don't trust the companies promise on 23m7. Today a GS was awarded 28 hours out, to an OOBGS. Problem was, it was never sent in base. A pilot called scheduling to highlight it and they just wanted to send it to a pay specialist for 23m7. Scheduler didnt want to fix it because it had been awaeded. The pilot said they had until 2 hours prior to fix it and the scheduler argued with him when he asked for a supervisor. Supervisor finally agreed and fixed it. This is just one of two shady (illegal...) things done today just in my category. But hey, we got their word they'll only abuse 23m7 inside 8 hours, so we got that going for us...
07-30-2023, 06:56 AM
#257
Moderator
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,807
The problem with your argument is that M7 only comes into play when they intentionally skip a step in coverage.
What you’re describing is a an award error or omission. The scheduler and/or supervisor were in error calling this an M7 use (a lot of things are called M7 that actually aren’t) and for them to do so actually jeopardizes the company’s settlement agreement. That phone call will be listened to by the scheduling committee, and I suspect this will be on the Company’s desk at 0800 Monday morning.
What you’re describing is a an award error or omission. The scheduler and/or supervisor were in error calling this an M7 use (a lot of things are called M7 that actually aren’t) and for them to do so actually jeopardizes the company’s settlement agreement. That phone call will be listened to by the scheduling committee, and I suspect this will be on the Company’s desk at 0800 Monday morning.
It stopped being an omission when the scheduler just said we'll push it to 23M7 for processing (28 hours out) and argued with the pilot when he mentioned the contract allows for fixes up to 2 hours prior. If he hadn't called and then stood his ground, this would have stayed. Zero trust that they'll do what they agreed to.
07-30-2023, 08:04 AM
#258
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,544
It stopped being an omission when the scheduler just said we'll push it to 23M7 for processing (28 hours out) and argued with the pilot when he mentioned the contract allows for fixes up to 2 hours prior. If he hadn't called and then stood his ground, this would have stayed. Zero trust that they'll do what they agreed to.
Keep the 0.05 and invest in catching these errors 100% of the time.
07-30-2023, 11:47 AM
#259
Bent over by buybacks
Joined APC: Feb 2017
Posts: 777
With all the nebulous things in pay, scheduling, RR and everything else, I motion that we stop the silliness of petty dues refunds and instead keep and divert that money to hiring more people and I.T. to automatically go over every single one of these things every single time.
Keep the 0.05 and invest in catching these errors 100% of the time.
Keep the 0.05 and invest in catching these errors 100% of the time.
It's absurd that pilots should need to fund, through their dues, the most basic of a company's obligations: honestly paying its employees on time. That's a cost mgmt, and not the pilots, must shoulder.
Any bets on how much reroute pay they will cheat us out of, starting August 1st?
Also, I have not received my refund yet, but my buddy got several hundred dollars.
Last edited by StoneQOLdCrazy; 07-30-2023 at 11:57 AM.
07-30-2023, 01:23 PM
#260
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 863
I'm thinking it will be less shorting of reroute pay since it will be much easier for pilots to keep track of what they are due. The ones not paying attention probably already weren't with the current rules. Also, there's the possibility of reroutes becoming less common with how expensive they are about to get.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
