TallFlyer

You and I must not be reading the same LOA. From LOA 5.5.d:

Thedude86

I think getting rid of SAP would be pretty dumb and self destructive even from the company's point of view.

Say they give us something to trick us into voting SAP away. Once it's known it was a s&*t deal and word gets out this place will be back to where it was back in late 2015 and early 2016 where they were lucky to get 3 new hires a class. Plus, it'll be worse because attrition will skyrocket. The company is going to have to pony up big bucks (probably more than what SAP costs them) to keep pilots here and to get new hires in the door since word will spread like wild fire that we don't have the SAP. A big reason why people weren't coming here in 2015/2016 wasn't just because of the pay. Upgrades were still relatively quick compared to other airlines at the time until people stopped showing for class. It was also because of the very low morale and what new hires read on these forums. If the company gets rid of SAP....that's what is going to happen again except this time it will be much worse. Last time it was attrition and no new hires. This time it will be HUGE attrition and no new hires.

Without the SAP, even with 4:15 min day and 100% DH...we'll be average at best. No reason to come here unless you live in one of our bases.

Systemized

No, we are reading the same LOA and the LOA does not specify what official list is used to measure "active captains?"

And this is where is gets complicated and confusing

It's not the master seniority list, because captains are listed active that are not active.

It's not the active eligibility list, because CAs that are listed eligible are then listed ineligible on the final bid award.

And the final bid award contradicts the CA eligibility list and the master seniority list.

Look at the round 1 bid, subtract all the ineligibles from the total number of pilots. That number should match the CA eligibility list but it's not even close.

What is it, the LOA doesn't specify? There's no official list and you have to eyeball everything, very easy for the company to manipulate.

Happyflyer

There not going to get you to vote the SAP away, anything you vote on will have a "SAP" according to the words on the paper.
What will happen is the SAP pot will look like it does after FCFS, using a % of block hours won't work because the company will methodically go though a make sure only complete garbage trips are included in the % of reserve block hours.
As the other poster said trip splits for training and vacation won't work because PBS monitors that when it constructs your line.
You also have to remember these are off the shelf products sold to airlines.
So you can write multiple PBS rounds, and reserve block hours into a contract with good faith, but since anything would be brand new it would require heavy programming and meanwhile the union would be enforcing it as well as they have done with CCP.
This pilot union has a track record of coming up with grand ideas that aren't able to be enforced as written, namely the concept of active captians, instead of a straight % of the seniority list, then there's CCP as mention above.
Why would any one want a union who can neither define, or enforce "active captains" to have a finger in drafting your monthly schedule for the rest of your career here.
All we heard from the crew rooms about the flow deal was we got over on them because the "captain snap shot" included everyone, which now smells like a load of BS.

And for the record, I am proud of the efforts are union guys are putting forth. I just think, since somehow, we keep getting screwed between what we expect will happen, and what does happen, the most reasonable thing to do is tell them to go pound sand until section 6 opens in 2023. Getting straight gains is one thing, but getting into contract rewrites is playing with fire with these managers, no matter how proud you are of any improved "soft pay package"

272922

If some of you would take a few more than 3 seconds thought with more than 3 brain cells without your tin foil hat on before you type you'd realize most of the stuff coming out of your keyboard is garbage.

So just to be clear, our "managers" are people we don't think can navigate themselves out of a wet paper bag in day to day ops, but are somehow evil, maniacal geniuses when it comes to contract negotiations about how to tweak every little word to screw us over.

Oh, and you're proud of all your union guys, but they all seem to be dumb@sses who can't seem to think more than a half step ahead and have no idea how anything in the real world actually works, and have made no efforts to enforce sections of the contract.

FlyyGuyy

contract enforcement here is a joke. "fly it and grieve it" "the company has different math skills"

I am going to grieve the flow number next month, and I am going to grieve that its a loss of about 30k. And each month it continues, I'll grieve another 30k loss. Because lets be real here, every month we are delayed a class at AA its a month of top of scale wide body captain pay we are losing.

Hey Travis are you reading this?
GIVE US AN UPDATE ON WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON WITH THIS ISSUE...and THE SAP...and CCP!

Quarryman

There used to be conference calls every few months. Those calls facilitated an avenue of communication and kept the group updated. I want to say the last one was sometime around mid March. I'd like to see those return in the very near future.

FlyyGuyy

I would like it too. I always called in. Knowing whats going on is important. Having ZERO insight into the many issues plaguing this place is troubling.

pilotRC7

Yep. Not sure what the hell is going on with the union lately. Ever since the "letter of no confidence" we've heard absolutely nothing from them. Except for the holiday email encouraging us to pick up open-time and help the company out...

Systemized

piedmont and Envoy use a base number of pilots on their seniority list and increase the flow by one for every 125 pilots added to the seniority list.

Our base number was essentially what the seniority list looked like when the LOA took effect, but it was total active captains instead of total pilots.

The union straight up said during the LOA roadshows, they came up with the active captain concept instead of using # of pilots on the seniority list. They straight up admitted the company offered to use total pilots on the list as a base number and increase flow by one for every 125 pilots added to the list but the union thought active captains was preferable to total pilots. That's what we could of had, a very simple method. Instead, our union pushed and was able to get the active captian language instead.

We had around 1200 pilots when the LOA passed and we now have 1400. We'd be at 6/month and going to 7/month very soon if we just stuck with total pilots on the seniority list instead the active captian concept.