cencal83406

If we had taken it to arbitration and lost, receiving $0 for this type of schedule change (hint they’re not removing or adding a segment when changing from operate to deadhead or vice versa), would we all be happier?

Scoop

This is the problem - I was told a cancled flight is in fact an IROP, which results in a recovery obligation. My operating flight was cancelled and I was scheduled to DH before the first leg. Sounded like an illegal reroute so I reached out to DALPA and they said it was correct that I would incur a recovery obligation, I got two things jack and squat. So that is why I think this whole issue is no big deal. This new agreement actually sounds pretty good to me.

Scoop

crewdawg

And what if we'd won? At this point, I expect the company to keep moving onto something else in the PWA they want improved in their favor. When we're clearly scared of the big bad arbitrator, and we just give stuff away like batch sizes, why wouldn't they keep pressing to test


Edit to add that I understand there is a needle to thread wrt to grievance settlement/arbitration. But you can't always be scared of arbitration.

myrkridia

Unfortunately a lot of the conversation is occurring on Facebook. For better or worse, I had to bite the bullet and rejoin the platform (after years of proudly abstaining) in order to be up to speed on all the latest hiring trends. I get wanting to tune out if you have one foot out the door, but anyone who wants to be engaged should just make a shell profile and join the couple pertinent groups. I've been training the algorithm by clicking X on all the bad group suggestions and am at a point where I solely use it before a trip or while bidding to catch up on what's going on, plus learn from other's contractual questions. My technique is to not have the app on my phone.
​​​​​

First Break

This settlement appears to have resolved grievance 18-12, which implies this dispute has existed since 2018. Which is over half a decade ago.

There must have been a good reason that none of the admins over that time period (including Bartels, Schnitzler, Ambrosi, and now Hartman) wanted to take this to an arbitrator. That tells me a lot about how weak our case may have been.

Even with past precedent on our side, it might be a stretch to convince anyone that moving from a working seat in command of the aircraft to a comfort seat sipping sparkling water and watching the IFE entitles one to thousands (or tens of thousands) of dollars of remediation for such an inconvenience. Do we really want to make that case and just hope the arbitrator sees it our way?

If a unilateral decision is made by the arbitrator to no longer classify such a change as a reroute, what other implications does it have to long standing interpretations of the PWA?

Love or hate the settlement agreement, I think reasonable people can disagree on if it was adequate. But based on the limited facts we know, it seems like grievance arbitration would have been a serious uphill climb with a real threat of doing serious damage had it not gone our way.

myrkridia

In isolation, this MOU might be framed as the lesser of two evils. The problem is that it follows a series of grievance settlements that incentivizes the company to unilaterally change past practice and roll the dice on either modifying the contract with carve-outs (be it arbitration in their favor or settling with us) or paying us back after we win. On its own, I'd perhaps be willing to look past this specific deal, but in context I am very concerned about the established trend since C2019 was signed.

First Break

No argument on the company’s abhorrent recent behavior. It is now clear to all of us what they intended when they unceremoniously struck “keep your deals” from the Rules of the Road.

But this dispute far predated the implementation of C2019. It may not have been the best hill to almost certainly die on.

Buck Rogers

Seems like a pretty logical assessment that might be worthy for a few folks to step back, take a deep breath, and ponder.

CRJphlyer

Why do that when it’s easier to just be angry and scream at clouds?

StoneQOLdCrazy

This is at least twice in DH's term that he has blinked when mgmt played chicken with him. Mgmt was bluffing. DH didn't consult the MEC. Just did his own thing without guidance from the MEC. AGAIN.

That's what he gets when he listens to the crippliningly risk averse ALPA attorney instead of being in sync with the pilots. And guess who follows him down that path every. Single. Time.

That's right! The C44 reps.

On second thought, maybe DH did have some guidance; it's quite likely the C44 reps pressured him behind the scenes to settle this.

Who knows how many more grievances they'll push to be settled in the company's favor like this until March 1!