Hillbilly

The 2004 rates were pre-bankruptcy. We took the first hit prior to bankruptcy with LOA #46 which took effect in December 2004.

Wilbur Wright

The PWA maximum scheduled duty day on the rotation includes the 30 min (not 45) after landing. The actual maximum duty day is scheduled plus 2 hours.

The FAR Flight Duty Period (FDP) ends at block in. That may be extended up to an additional two hours with concurrence of the PIC and the company.

Hillbilly

If DALPA and the company are still engaged in negotiations over 117, which I understand that they are, then it would be detrimental to the process in my opinion to file a grievance at this time. If they reach an agreement, those affected pilots who are on the "grievance list" will be made whole. It is my understanding that DALPA has made it clear to the company that if this is not resolved in negotiations, then they reserve the right to file the grievance and will absolutely do so. That seems like a very logical and methodical way of handling this to me, but what do I know.

I like the way you're thinking about having a way to make pilots whole while waiting for this to play out. The Furlough/Emergency Relief Fund has some very specific guidelines that drive who qualifies for funds and I admittedly am not familiar with them all. I do not know if this alone would meet that hurdle unless the pilot could show that they are in trouble financially. I certainly believe that if the value of the Personal Drops would put a pilot in the position of not being able to make his monthly house payment, he would qualify for the funds. I'm not so sure a pilot would qualify to replace the value of the drops if he has a decent amount of savings and his income still exceeds all of his demonstrable financial obligations. In that case we would have to come up with a different way, but I don't know what that would be.

hockeypilot44

Would our leverage increase if every single pilot stopped working into the FAR extension or is that illegal? There was no status quo when these FARs went into effect.

Burn Notice

tu- 204..........

Bucking Bar

Kindly also add to your considerations one group of the above pay rates involves flying aircraft at arbitrary limits which the types are not certificated for. Further, each separate certificate functions as an individual fleet type adding remarkable complexity as well as their parasitic cost of redundant managers and stakeholders.

The Delta rates reflect unrestrained productivity and flexibilities.

Certainly an argument can be made that operation of 40% of Deltas domestic flight is core to our business model.

As our express partners find it more difficult to staff their operations this will become a Delta problem sooner rather than later. Delta has a "first mover" advantage and can save money by in sourcing ... Because the only way to preserve the cost model Delta management wants, is to make express jobs into "Delta jobs" inducing applicants to work for less (roughly current book) in exchange for a "real job."

Only ALPA has the tool box to make that happen. I would also guess there is considerable resistance in some corners. If ALPA is willing to create this proposal, and I think we should, we could be looking to improve our contract, just as we did when ALPA facilitated unity with Northwest.

Herkflyr

It is a strange day indeed that I agree with you. In fact it would probably be even better to pay a small assessment to cover this (subject to membership approval of said assessment). Then, there would be no waiting period for the small numbers of reserves who need recoupment.

Eventually we will come to an agreement with the company. As part of that agreement there would have to be a stipulation that the company would repay ALPA for the assessment money used to pay for the loss of pay, and then the assessment could be returned to the pilot group entirely.

While this is just speculation, I am pretty sure something like this has been discussed for awhile.

Superdad

This is absolutely the wrong way of handling the situation, in my opinion. The reason MGMT even tried to unilaterally alter the contract is because of this type of thinking. I am all for getting along, but when MGMT violates the contract we file a grievance. MGMT had a LONG time to negotiate these issues and chose to wait and then attempt to issue a memo changing our CBA. Why? Because they knew they could get away with it. We can still get along with MGMT and stand up for ourselves at the same time, we might never find ourselves in these types of situations...

Alan Shore

This is hardly anything new, having been in the FAQs since they first came out a year ago. What's new are the highlighted questions, such as the BS about having only 30 days after calling in sick to provide verification or face unilateral loss of pay.

Bucking Bar

OK I understand coverage awards.

What is a pre award (not training, vacation, etc... But an ugly trip that wasn't bid)?