Thanks, guys. Disregard the hotel section above, I had to edit it for content. This is the (hopefully) final version. Please contact me if you see any glaring errors. Thanks,,,
Section 20 - Hotels
This section can be referred to as a “Twinkie”. A Twinkie has no nutritional value; therefore its contribution to ending your hunger is fleeting and temporary. The same thing can be said for this section. The proposed Sec. 20 ver. 2.2 (authored by the original Hotel Committee) was expected to take at least one week to negotiate. The version in the current T/A (authored by the “new” Hotel Committee) was done via breakout group and took one day.
The NPA claimed that the entire new T.A. was a complete re-write when, in fact, it has been almost completely copied from the current CBA with changes to certain sections EXCEPT for Hotels. What you have here is a complete re-write that has the
beginnings of some good things, but loopholes throughout that give the company carte blanche to often simply ignore them.
-A.1 – Missing section in new T.A. Removed (by accident or deliberate?) on “final” T.A. Originally contained the phrase “Affordable”. Why is that in there? Management could argue that NPA signed off on affordable hotels, so that means no more business level hotels. Where is the term “affordable” defined? Will it be back in the final we sign?
-A.2.a – Interior corridor, non-smoking, non-handicapped accessible rooms above the 1st floor. This is an improvement but has some obvious loopholes:
[FONT="]o[/FONT]Interior corridor was not further defined to say, “not open to the atmospheric elements”. Vast knowledge of hotel layout and construction would have prevented this mistake. Ever been to the Comfort Inn – Hilton Head, S.C.? It is interior corridor, but those corridors are not enclosed, thus allowing humidity and insects into the room via the front door. Makes it much harder to control noise as well.
[FONT="]o[/FONT]“Above ground floor” means floor #2. You are still subject to street level noise. Language stating upper 1/3 of all floors would take care of this. It is a cost neutral item because the hotel simply pre-blocks those higher rooms for the pilots the day before arrival.
- A.3.c. – 5 hours scheduled/rescheduled sits require a hotel room – same as current book. Wasn’t the 13 hour duty day and 4.5 average day supposed to REDUCE ground sits? Why, therefore, did we not obtain a better sit clause?
-A.5 – Gave up 12 hour delineation point for hotels 20-30 minutes away, now at 10:01 SCHEDULED or longer, Company can put you in a hotel that is 30 minutes away, and this is waivable to be a LONGER drive away by the Hotel Committee (A-6).
-A.6 – Waives A.4 and A.5 if the PILOT HOTEL COMMITTEE wants. Not the NPA BOD, just the committee, can waive your right to have a hotel on a ground sit or how far the hotel is away from the airport.
[FONT="]o[/FONT]
Why would you put a Waiver Clause in something as critical as this? A committee may not always be staffed with experienced individuals and may in fact be loaded with pilots who will grant a waiver to management.
NOTE: Section B is missing COMPLETELY from the “Final” draft, skips to Section C
-C.1.b – The NPA agreed to let the company “mutually agree to” whether our hotel Committee Chairman is the direct liaison or not? Anyone remember who got fired a couple months ago and had their job reinstated recently?
-D.1 – Overall excellent improvements in language requiring the company to submit hotel information to the PHC in advance before they examine the hotel on-site, but nothing binding the company to choose a mutually agreeable hotel.
-D.1.a. – Allows the PHC to add two more hotels of our choosing to the table. However, does not bind Company into selecting one of these hotels, therefore effort is futile.
-D.2.b – Does not bind the Company into selecting a hotel that is “mutually acceptable” as is the case at Delta and United. Hasn’t the NPA been preaching “industry standard”?
-E.2.b – Free access is not mentioned here for business center facilities, just that they’ll be available.
-E.2.c – Needs to be re-worded to say that, “All hotel contracts will provide for free in-room wired or wireless high-speed internet access. If not free, then the Company will pre-pay the cost”. The way the T/A language written, if a hotel does not provide free internet access to its clients then that hotel could be eliminated on the spot. That means no more Marriott, Hyatt, Hilton, Embassy Suites, Renaissance, Westin, etc. which is what the polling data indicates pilots really want.
-E.2.d – Good quality workout facilities must be included…on-premises. Not requiring a walk of up to ¼ mile.
-E.2.e. – 100% ambiguous. Define “nearby”. Define “retail”. Does not require hotel to provide transportation to those venues, and by not defining “nearby”, could negate any gains in this paragraph. Who wants to walk ½ a mile to a mall in the Winter?
-E.2.i. – No mention of ban against rooms having a connecting door to an adjacent room. This is a
priority security item and, in most casts, cost-neutral.
-E.2.k. – Another loophole allowing any or all of the above standards to be
waived by just the Hotel Committee.
-E.3 - “Current hotel properties are ‘grandfathered from the above standards…” So we get absolutely NOTHING for the few gains in this section if we stay in the current properties.
-G.1.a. – Vans running every 30 minutes. This is what Ramada’s, Sleep Inn’s, Holiday Inn’s, and Comfort Inn’s do. Most Business level hotels run it every 15 or 20 minutes. A clause needs to be written in that if the hotel can not/will not meet this schedule, then the Company will pay for and utilize private transportation….just like United, Delta, American. Remember: “Industry Standard”, right?
-G.1.a – No language that says our crews will be taken directly to and from the hotel with no intermediate stops and/or waiting to pick up other passengers or other airline crew. This does not preclude other passengers and/or airline crews from riding with our crews; as long as such individual(s) are ready to depart when our crews are ready to depart.
-H.1 – Hotel in a “location” that has 2 restaurants does not mean, “on-premises”.
-H.2 – Here “location” is further redefined in the Company’s favor. Another “or” loophole. So if the hotel has no food “on-site”, then a pilot may have to walk up to ¼ mile in the rain, snow, at night, and/or in dangerous neighborhood just to get food.
-H.3 – “table side service” with “full waiter/waitress staff employed and available” and Q&A section says that a “Waffle House” is an allowable restaurant to satisfy this section.
-H.4 – So donuts in the MKE Sheraton Four Points is supposed to be in lieu of a traditional nutritious breakfast.
-H.5.– No lighting requirement mentioned if no restaurant on-property and you have to walk. A crew could start out down the path but get mugged and never make it to destination because it is unlit or improperly lit.
-I.2.a – Temporary lodging due to unavailability of regular hotel can exceed 20-30 minutes away with no max. Rest increased in the amount of 30 minutes each way.
-J.1 – Establishes a complaint reporting system.
[FONT="]o[/FONT]Does not mandate an electronic or computerized system. Therefore Company could change it any time to some sort of antiquated paper system. Does not require the company to do anything about the complaints.
CURRENT SELF-WALK PROCEDURES ARE NO LONGER AUTHORIZED!
Remember, all side-letters in our current CBA become null and void if this is ratified.
Delta Airlines Section 5 hotel language (who our rates are being compared to), even in bankruptcy, has the following safety net statement: “This process is intended to result in the selection of mutually acceptable lodging accommodations.” United Airlines has managed to maintain their high quality business level hotels, even in bankruptcy, by mandating full service restaurants be located on hotel premises.
To sum it up, all you have to do is ask yourself the following question: Will this new language get the pilots out of the PHL Comfort Inn, or the IND Ramada Inn? This is the most basic test. If the answer is, “No”, then you have an unacceptable hotel section.
