MD11 Undermanning Issue
#1
MD11 Undermanning Issue
From Our MEC today....
"ALPA has received multiple inquiries regarding pilots being asked by management to withdraw from training on Bid 23-01 and remain on the MD-11. The Association is currently investigating these inquiries."
Given the current environment, is it incumbent upon the crew force to solve the company's manning issues? Is it prudent?
Discuss.
In Transparency, Integrity, and Unity (for Everyone),
DLax
"ALPA has received multiple inquiries regarding pilots being asked by management to withdraw from training on Bid 23-01 and remain on the MD-11. The Association is currently investigating these inquiries."
Given the current environment, is it incumbent upon the crew force to solve the company's manning issues? Is it prudent?
Discuss.
In Transparency, Integrity, and Unity (for Everyone),
DLax
#2
From Our MEC today....
"ALPA has received multiple inquiries regarding pilots being asked by management to withdraw from training on Bid 23-01 and remain on the MD-11. The Association is currently investigating these inquiries."
Given the current environment, is it incumbent upon the crew force to solve the company's manning issues? Is it prudent?
Discuss.
In Transparency, Integrity, and Unity (for Everyone),
DLax
"ALPA has received multiple inquiries regarding pilots being asked by management to withdraw from training on Bid 23-01 and remain on the MD-11. The Association is currently investigating these inquiries."
Given the current environment, is it incumbent upon the crew force to solve the company's manning issues? Is it prudent?
Discuss.
In Transparency, Integrity, and Unity (for Everyone),
DLax
For example, commute to A77C at 95% or stay in the top 20% on the MD FO list....hmmmm yea I'll take the later with a seat lock. It's always been an option to withdrawal, and get the seat lock. It just hasn't happened on this scale in some time. Good luck to the union on this one.
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,121
If someone wants to stay on the MD, forego their slot on another plane, and accept that they will get a seat lock per our CBA, I fail to see what the problem is?
For example, commute to A77C at 95% or stay in the top 20% on the MD FO list....hmmmm yea I'll take the later with a seat lock. It's always been an option to withdrawal, and get the seat lock. It just hasn't happened on this scale in some time. Good luck to the union on this one.
For example, commute to A77C at 95% or stay in the top 20% on the MD FO list....hmmmm yea I'll take the later with a seat lock. It's always been an option to withdrawal, and get the seat lock. It just hasn't happened on this scale in some time. Good luck to the union on this one.
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2023
Posts: 417
From Our MEC today....
"ALPA has received multiple inquiries regarding pilots being asked by management to withdraw from training on Bid 23-01 and remain on the MD-11. The Association is currently investigating these inquiries."
Given the current environment, is it incumbent upon the crew force to solve the company's manning issues? Is it prudent?
Discuss.
In Transparency, Integrity, and Unity (for Everyone),
DLax
"ALPA has received multiple inquiries regarding pilots being asked by management to withdraw from training on Bid 23-01 and remain on the MD-11. The Association is currently investigating these inquiries."
Given the current environment, is it incumbent upon the crew force to solve the company's manning issues? Is it prudent?
Discuss.
In Transparency, Integrity, and Unity (for Everyone),
DLax
For example, commute to A77C at 95% or stay in the top 20% on the MD FO list....hmmmm yea I'll take the later with a seat lock. It's always been an option to withdrawal, and get the seat lock. It just hasn't happened on this scale in some time. Good luck to the union on this one.
The company has two options per the CBA, post another system bid and train out the previos bid, or they can cancell the previos system bid.
The fact that the company wants to abrogate seniority by selectively asking pilots to give up a slot to an awarded seat because they are short of pilots in a particular seat should be investigated by the union. There is a difference in a pilot deciding this on their own and being seat locked because of it and a pilot being asked to do this and possibly not being seat locked.
It seems that after bid 23-01 trains out, there will be vacancies in the MD. Those vacancies need to be awarded by a system bid, not some side deal.
#6
Except that there may not be a seat lock per our CBA. That is up to the SCP. Where in the CBA does it say that the company may solicit pilots to give up their training from a system bid to solve the company's manning problem?
The company has two options per the CBA, post another system bid and train out the previos bid, or they can cancell the previos system bid.
The fact that the company wants to abrogate seniority by selectively asking pilots to give up a slot to an awarded seat because they are short of pilots in a particular seat should be investigated by the union. There is a difference in a pilot deciding this on their own and being seat locked because of it and a pilot being asked to do this and possibly not being seat locked.
It seems that after bid 23-01 trains out, there will be vacancies in the MD. Those vacancies need to be awarded by a system bid, not some side deal.
The company has two options per the CBA, post another system bid and train out the previos bid, or they can cancell the previos system bid.
The fact that the company wants to abrogate seniority by selectively asking pilots to give up a slot to an awarded seat because they are short of pilots in a particular seat should be investigated by the union. There is a difference in a pilot deciding this on their own and being seat locked because of it and a pilot being asked to do this and possibly not being seat locked.
It seems that after bid 23-01 trains out, there will be vacancies in the MD. Those vacancies need to be awarded by a system bid, not some side deal.
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2021
Posts: 442
Except that there may not be a seat lock per our CBA. That is up to the SCP. Where in the CBA does it say that the company may solicit pilots to give up their training from a system bid to solve the company's manning problem?
The company has two options per the CBA, post another system bid and train out the previos bid, or they can cancell the previos system bid.
The fact that the company wants to abrogate seniority by selectively asking pilots to give up a slot to an awarded seat because they are short of pilots in a particular seat should be investigated by the union. There is a difference in a pilot deciding this on their own and being seat locked because of it and a pilot being asked to do this and possibly not being seat locked.
It seems that after bid 23-01 trains out, there will be vacancies in the MD. Those vacancies need to be awarded by a system bid, not some side deal.
The company has two options per the CBA, post another system bid and train out the previos bid, or they can cancell the previos system bid.
The fact that the company wants to abrogate seniority by selectively asking pilots to give up a slot to an awarded seat because they are short of pilots in a particular seat should be investigated by the union. There is a difference in a pilot deciding this on their own and being seat locked because of it and a pilot being asked to do this and possibly not being seat locked.
It seems that after bid 23-01 trains out, there will be vacancies in the MD. Those vacancies need to be awarded by a system bid, not some side deal.
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2019
Posts: 1,066
Helping the company during negotiations, Yep, Always the right move. But then, the Dbags who flew extra before the first TA really helped. A year later and the NC thinks we are going to get gains above the lost wages. Well, Go somewhere else, oh wait, thats gone.
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,121
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post