Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
03-02-2013, 07:23 AM
Banned
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Position: 36N15
Posts: 323
Really? So let's put two pilots in the cockpit who can't work together. Sounds like a good CRM policy to me.
03-02-2013, 07:24 AM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Have to disagree here to some extent. While it might be "good" for the individual to get a GS, collectively I think its bad. We are constantly hearing the phrase "overstaffed" come from Network. This could lead to some MDs to lower paying jets for some junior guys. Not to mention future hiring could be impacted. I wonder how "overstaffed" we would be if everyone just flew their awarded line?
03-02-2013, 07:27 AM
Straight QOL, homie
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
Posts: 4,202
The concept of everyone flying his assigned line and nothing more is admirable--but let's be careful about advocating for it against the status quo.
Could be deemed an illegal work action, and the company could subpoena this web board.
03-02-2013, 07:28 AM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
I thought even after the "Verification" requirement kicks in (yet another concessionary item, thanks ALPA), the Man can't ask you anything until after your 5th call per sick year.
Is that 5 one-day trips? or 5 five-day trips? I don't use much sick time, but I hate the feeling of not being trusted by the company to do the right thing.
Is that 5 one-day trips? or 5 five-day trips? I don't use much sick time, but I hate the feeling of not being trusted by the company to do the right thing.
I still don't see how the new policy is concessionary. Nothing stops them from asking for verification at any point under the old policy. They could call for verification on your first used sick hour of the year. You now get 100 hours of "no questions asked" sick usage.
So how is the new policy concessionary? I'm not trying to be argumentative here. I just don't see the concessionary side of the new policy.
03-02-2013, 07:33 AM
Straight QOL, homie
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
Posts: 4,202
The term "concessionary" was an inaccurate portrayal. I should have said "inadequate."
I don't think the company should be able to get in our chili on medical matters, period. We have sick time. We should get to use it when we need it without harassment. The end.
I suppose something like the 15 consecutive day verification is understandable, but how can they trust us to fly the plane while micromanaging our sick usage?
I suppose there are the abusers that make it necessary.
In any case, I absolutely abhor the notion that the company can get into our medical records. I hope ALPA goes to the mat with the legal team to prevent this from a HIPPA standpoint. But I won't hold my breath. Hopefully no one will press-to-test without a legitimate situation.
03-02-2013, 07:36 AM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
true.
The term "concessionary" was an inaccurate portrayal. I should have said "inadequate."
I don't think the company should be able to get in our chili on medical matters, period. I suppose something like the 15 consecutive day verification is understandable, but how can they trust us to fly the plane while micromanaging our sick usage?
I suppose there are the abusers that make it necessary.
I absolutely abhor the notion that the company can get into our medical records.
The term "concessionary" was an inaccurate portrayal. I should have said "inadequate."
I don't think the company should be able to get in our chili on medical matters, period. I suppose something like the 15 consecutive day verification is understandable, but how can they trust us to fly the plane while micromanaging our sick usage?
I suppose there are the abusers that make it necessary.
I absolutely abhor the notion that the company can get into our medical records.
I can agree with inadequate. Actually, I can agree with your entire post. Thanks for clarifying.
03-02-2013, 07:37 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: 7er
Posts: 1,673
Sorry if I'm not thrilled about seeing GS's going out to the senior line holders while at the same time I'm maxing out on SC's and RAW because there is less than minimal weekend coverage.
03-02-2013, 07:39 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: A big one that looks like a little one
Posts: 633
I think he meant that it's good in a sense it puts financial pressure on the company to hire.
The concept of everyone flying his assigned line and nothing more is admirable--but let's be careful about advocating for it against the status quo.
Could be deemed an illegal work action, and the company could subpoena this web board.
03-02-2013, 07:43 AM
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
GSs are great don't get me wrong but I think 1067 has a good point. If the 777/744 were massively over staffed but they covered all the trips via GSs and had no issues, is that a good thing or bad thing?
I say bad for the same reason I'd rather return to the bow wave, I want more people in every category, not less. Even if it caps the hours I can get paid.
Same with weekend coverage, if they can live with 50 during the week, hope about 50 on the weekend. That's increase the number of pilots.
I say bad for the same reason I'd rather return to the bow wave, I want more people in every category, not less. Even if it caps the hours I can get paid.
Same with weekend coverage, if they can live with 50 during the week, hope about 50 on the weekend. That's increase the number of pilots.
I like the bow wave system. Isn't coverage required lower on the weekends due to reduced frequency on the weekends?
03-02-2013, 07:44 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: A big one that looks like a little one
Posts: 633
true.
The term "concessionary" was an inaccurate portrayal. I should have said "inadequate."
I don't think the company should be able to get in our chili on medical matters, period. We have sick time. We should get to use it when we need it without harassment. The end.
I suppose something like the 15 consecutive day verification is understandable, but how can they trust us to fly the plane while micromanaging our sick usage?
I suppose there are the abusers that make it necessary.
In any case, I absolutely abhor the notion that the company can get into our medical records. I hope ALPA goes to the mat with the legal team to prevent this from a HIPPA standpoint. But I won't hold my breath. Hopefully no one will press-to-test without a legitimate situation.
The term "concessionary" was an inaccurate portrayal. I should have said "inadequate."
I don't think the company should be able to get in our chili on medical matters, period. We have sick time. We should get to use it when we need it without harassment. The end.
I suppose something like the 15 consecutive day verification is understandable, but how can they trust us to fly the plane while micromanaging our sick usage?
I suppose there are the abusers that make it necessary.
In any case, I absolutely abhor the notion that the company can get into our medical records. I hope ALPA goes to the mat with the legal team to prevent this from a HIPPA standpoint. But I won't hold my breath. Hopefully no one will press-to-test without a legitimate situation.
Don't be fooled into thinking they can just call the doctors office and ask. Docs carry malpractice insurance for more than ODing babies and cutting off the wrong leg.
So what makes you think they have access to our medical records?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
