Viper25

It is ALPA that is capitulating to the company. Check the 23M7, batch sizes, and CNO fiascos for the recent examples.

You have it absolutely backwards. And getting the company to begrudgingly comply with the PB/PR issues (and the company is still only restoring people reactively) is not exactly the company capitulating either.

FangsF15

It’s a fair question. My understanding of his rationale is that the widespread a use of 23.M.7 by the company, and the abrogation of seniority along with needing to stop pilots from making self-serving side deals (by calling CS and offering their services) outweighed the “give”. And that getting a firm commitment with automation was worth it. (Yes, the company has failed to actually publish every use of 23.M.7, but that also gave them the rope to hang themselves via grievance).

While I agree that something needed to be done about 23.M.7 abuse and the wild-west style freelancing, I disagree with SK on the 23.M.7 settlement. But I also don’t need to agree with every single little thing with a candidate to see the overwhelming weight of other goodness that person does. For example, a good buddy of mine supported 67, with some good points. But I disagreed, and we are still good buddies. Because we are adults. I think far too many people compromise their own critical thinking in deference to some borg-like hive mind. Frankly, it’s healthy to have the occasional disagreement.

crewdawg

Do you think people have stopped calling CS to make their own side deals? How do we know one way or another?
​​​

CBreezy

​​​​​​
They have not. I know of at least one person that does. Now whether they get it or not is a different discussion
​​​​​

Cranberry

I agree with you on pretty much all, it wasn't a dig, I was genuinely curious so I appreciate the considerate response.

I also agree about disagreement. It's good the MEC sometimes goes 9-8 because it shows there is spirited debate. Ultimately there is more that unites and divides us, it's just that last 1% that we can get hung up on (which isn't a bad thing).

crewdawg

Agreed. I assume their level of success has decreased dramatically, but I bet if I went and checked the schedule of one of the most prolific from my fleet (in ATL), there are some shenanigans going on. If I remember correctly, this dude had a 6 or 7 day domestic trip one time...all voluntary.

Scoop

I doubt it. More than once I have heard of Pilots on sits calling crew tracking to advise that they are available for reroute. This seems very fishy to me - could Pilots volunteering for reroutes reduce GS? Seems to me if the companyy wants to reroute a Pilot they will, but calling crew tracking to say that you are available seems like "fishing" for a side deal to me.

Scoop

crewdawg

It absolutely does and there are some pilots who did it a lot a few years ago. The guy I mentioned above, had a few months straight where every trip went into extra days, and multiple went into 2 extra days. Noone is that unlucky. I assume many are still doing it and you're right, it's flat out theft from their fellow pilots. The fact that there is no way for the union to punish it's own members for things like this is astounding. Not that I'd advocate for extreme measures, but I know how the local unions would handle people like this.

HelloNewnan

The problem is that RR has now become essentially a GS, or more if you ring the trip credit bell. Get past the first RR day, and now you're at GS pay, didn't have to wait by the phone, or get lucky with a SS. Heck, you already got a shirt dirty, and no fighting about if it qualified for the reroute note or not.

If you get in past 4 hours domestic, it turns into serious money that's better than a GS. A reserve RR into an X day is even better. We, as a group, are pretty good about sniffing out the good deals, and once people clue in, there you go.

myrkridia

I can already hear the counter argument:

"My RR pays me more than your GS."