ASA TA summary....

[GearUpLightsIn]

General
o Crew Scheduling may schedule a pilot for more than 28.5 hours per week and 97.5
hours per month.

Maybe that was a typo. Maybe it was supposed to be:
General
o Crew Scheduling may NOT schedule a pilot for more than 28.5 hours per week and 97.5
hours per month.

The point in mentioning it was that they get to schedule us for another hour a week over current book.

 

[John Pennekamp]

General
o Crew Scheduling may schedule a pilot for more than 28.5 hours per week and 97.5
hours per month.

Maybe that was a typo. Maybe it was supposed to be:
General
o Crew Scheduling may NOT schedule a pilot for more than 28.5 hours per week and 97.5
hours per month.

The point in mentioning it was that they get to schedule us for another hour a week over current book.

Yeah, let's hope so, but I'm not holding my breath. This is one of those issues ASA creatively interpreted all the time to benefit them both ways. And it used to be 27.5 hours.

While we're on the topic, Bob Arnold used to have a saying: "What ASA is doing is like if my neighbor stole my truck, and now he's trying to sell it back to me". It seems that the CNC bought the truck back on a lot of these "stolen" issues. They should have stood their ground.

 

[PCL_128]

I've seen bullet point concepts, but this is the first time I've seen the actual proposed language.

You didn't see the proposed language even when you were in office?

 

[Long Time Gone]

General
o Crew Scheduling may schedule a pilot for more than 28.5 hours per week and 97.5
hours per month.

Maybe that was a typo. Maybe it was supposed to be:
General
o Crew Scheduling may NOT schedule a pilot for more than 28.5 hours per week and 97.5
hours per month.

The point in mentioning it was that they get to schedule us for another hour a week over current book.

I understand your point about the NOT possibly missing, but that 27.5 rule was BS anyway. I can't begin to tell you how much money I've lost due to that BS rule. Countless times I've had multiple hours taken off of my schedule when the Revised Schedules came out due to month to month conflicts and that rule. These adjustments were made 12 to 14 days prior to the actual conflict. I can count on one hand the amount of times that such a conflict (30 in 7) would have actually been a real conflict.

These adjustments for month to month conflicts are made 2 weeks prior to the actual conflict all due to a BS rule that only benefits the company and takes money out of my paycheck. How many times have you flown your exact schedule from the 1st of the month to the end without any changes (cancellations, re-routes, etc.)???? In over 5 years, I've done it ONCE.

I personally don't care if I get scheduled for 30 in 7. The possibility of me doing the 30 hours is 50/50. When a restriction like this is in a contract, all it does is take possible money out of my pocket.

 

[John Pennekamp]

You didn't see the proposed language even when you were in office?

No, just the concepts ans bullet point summaries.

 

[WWEfan]

This whole summary is just concepts and bullet points. Don't get too worked up over it until you see the actual language. Come to a road show and ask all your tough questions. Then make your decision yea or nay.

 

[Beergut]

This whole summary is just concepts and bullet points. Don't get too worked up over it until you see the actual language. Come to a road show and ask all your tough questions. Then make your decision yea or nay.

Ditto! Wait for the roadshow boys before you go off on a SUMMARY. A lot of effort and time has been put in by the CNC and you naysayers are not showing them much respect for what is obviously a thankless job. They have shown great restraint over the past 5 years by not being brought up on assault charges for slamming one of the management jackasses head into the table.

WAIT FOR THE ROADSHOW BEFORE YOU START THROWING ROCKS!

 

[Tomct]

WAIT FOR THE ROADSHOW BEFORE YOU START THROWING ROCKS![/quote]

AGREED! Let's see what they have at the Road Show!!

 

[www.]

Another concession. Even the chief pilots have backed us up that the 27.5/97.5 works both ways. Not any more... now the company can have their cake and eat it too.

You can thank PD for this one.

 

[JoeMerchant]

You can thank PD for this one.

Care to elaborate? Why did Pete want it? I happen to agree with it, but just curious as to what you think.....

 

[ASACAPT]

No, just the concepts ans bullet point summaries.

You were in office when Section 13 was TA'ed.

 

[John Pennekamp]

You were in office when Section 13 was TA'ed.

You guys never gave us the actual language. Only a chart comparing positions and a concept summary.

 

[sinkrate]

One of the problems with dragging out 'section six' negotiations is it is considered very bad form to go back and re-open previously TA'd sections. If you try it will be labeled 'bad faith negotations' and the NMB will never release you. You have been in negotiations for five years and much in the industry has changed in that time. In your situation just about the only way to revisit those previously TA'd sections is for the entire pilot group to reject the entire TA. The MEC can then direct the NC to go back and seek the neccessary improvemnets. I'm not suggesting you do this - it is a calculated strategy that may or may not get you 'released'.

I do know that once a Scheduling manager discovers the extension provisions for reassignments in your TA they are going to kill you with it.

 

[Tomct]

We all know that they eventually want a PBS system. Well, if they want it....it is REALLY GOING TO COST THEM!! Given; and I say this very carefully, "...given this TA passes, We will have a GREAT deal of leverage with exchanging our new section 13 for PBS. Really anxious to see what the road show has to say. Guys/gals, write your questions down so that when the roadshows start, YOU ARE READY to ASK THE QUESTIONS!