Is CAL acting responsibly while serving the traveling public?

[densoo]

Can't use that excuse anymore. There are about 400 left.

The impact lingers. They led by example as a generation of pilots sat in their right seats.

Open time pickup, VJM, vacation waive, selling vacation, waiving contractual duty day, are activities well distributed throughout the entire pilot group now.

And on it goes, as even the most recent hires have become more than adept at the game, probably out of frustration at being at half pay, no medical initially, and stuck with incredibly backwards reserve rules.

When there is plenty, everyone is generous; when there is scarcity, everyone is fighting each other over scraps. There's been scarcity there for a long time.

 

[tomgoodman]

Think ahead

When there is plenty, everyone is generous; when there is scarcity, everyone is fighting each other over scraps.

That's a universal truth, not limited to airlines or pilots. If you want everyone to get a "fair share" during times of scarcity, you must lock in rules to that effect during times of plenty, when such rules appear unnecessary.

 

[densoo]

That's a universal truth, not limited to airlines or pilots. If you want everyone to get a "fair share" during times of scarcity, you must lock in rules to that effect during times of plenty, when such rules appear unnecessary.

Well put. But who makes the rules?

 

[tomgoodman]

Plan for the worst

Well put. But who makes the rules?

In this case, the rules have to be laid out in the pilot contract. For example, an 80 hour flying cap that drops to 75 if anyone is furloughed, continued medical coverage for furloughees, etc. One problem is that "negotiating capital" usually has to be spent to get such items, and even junior pilots might prefer to spend that capital on a pay raise during times of plenty. It's the same reasoning that leads many people to go without health insurance as long as they feel fine, and then can't afford it when they get sick.

 

[densoo]

In this case, the rules have to be laid out in the pilot contract. For example, an 80 hour flying cap that drops to 75 if anyone is furloughed, continued medical coverage for furloughees, etc. One problem is that "negotiating capital" usually has to be spent to get such items, and even junior pilots might prefer to spend that capital on a pay raise during times of plenty. It's the same reasoning that leads many people to go without health insurance as long as they feel fine, and then can't afford it when they get sick.

"Negotiating capital"--great description of leverage. Problem is there just isn't enough of that to get started. Like the aphorism "it takes money to make money," there has to be some seed money to get started. There is none.

The company has successfully managed to keep the employees so flat out defeated that people end up fighting over scraps. Mostly what has happened the last two contracts is the senior have preserved as much as they've been able to for themselves at the expense of work rules (PBS, vacation that really isn't time off, annual sim events on your days off, half pay until 5th year, no medical to start, etc), disproportionally affecting the bottom of the pilot group.

This was possible because when the contracts were negotiated junior pilots were not on the property due to furlough so they couldn't influence what affected them. What is already an abysmal contract is x2 for them. And the fact that members of the negiating committees for the last two contracts are now working for the company speaks for itself.

If they are on the property during the next vote, it could be ugly. And who could blame them. One group took the scraps twice; when they get their chance the junior folks may just take it back. One example: the lump sum is a negotiated, contractual item. They have zero in the A Plan so they could very well cast deciding votes to get rid of the lump sum and have only the annuity.

Taking care of the junior people in the group is a strategic investment in the future. Reference UAL in Flying the Line. They got the guys in training to not cross the line and then took care of them afterwards. These new guys in turn supported the senior guys in future contracts.

Couldn't paint a more opposite picture in a group that literally steals from each other in ever more imaginitive ways. Last year two dozen got divorced so they could get the lump sum (distributed by the court in the divorce settlement), but then turned right around and got remarried. Seems slick until you realize the A Fund is the pilots' money, not the company's. Yet another way to take from one group to "get mine."

The whole culture of open time pickup, waiving vacation, picking up the slack for the company while guys are on furlough . . . it won't end well.

 

[zonker]

"Negotiating capital"--great description of leverage. Problem is there just isn't enough of that to get started. Like the aphorism "it takes money to make money," there has to be some seed money to get started. There is none.

The company has successfully managed to keep the employees so flat out defeated that people end up fighting over scraps. Mostly what has happened the last two contracts is the senior have preserved as much as they've been able to for themselves at the expense of work rules (PBS, vacation that really isn't time off, annual sim events on your days off, half pay until 5th year, no medical to start, etc), disproportionally affecting the bottom of the pilot group.

This was possible because when the contracts were negotiated junior pilots were not on the property due to furlough so they couldn't influence what affected them. What is already an abysmal contract is x2 for them. And the fact that members of the negiating committees for the last two contracts are now working for the company speaks for itself.

If they are on the property during the next vote, it could be ugly. And who could blame them. One group took the scraps twice; when they get their chance the junior folks may just take it back. One example: the lump sum is a negotiated, contractual item. They have zero in the A Plan so they could very well cast deciding votes to get rid of the lump sum and have only the annuity.

Taking care of the junior people in the group is a strategic investment in the future. Reference UAL in Flying the Line. They got the guys in training to not cross the line and then took care of them afterwards. These new guys in turn supported the senior guys in future contracts.

Couldn't paint a more opposite picture in a group that literally steals from each other in ever more imaginitive ways. Last year two dozen got divorced so they could get the lump sum (distributed by the court in the divorce settlement), but then turned right around and got remarried. Seems slick until you realize the A Fund is the pilots' money, not the company's. Yet another way to take from one group to "get mine."

The whole culture of open time pickup, waiving vacation, picking up the slack for the company while guys are on furlough . . . it won't end well.

Don't forget the greatest theft of all (Age 65) was foisted upon us by a CAL pilot.

 

[densoo]

Don't forget the greatest theft of all (Age 65) was foisted upon us by a CAL pilot.

Heard on the TA tours:

-- Two concessionary contracts ago: "We've got to overweight the senior guys to protect their retirement. Got to protect the A-Fund--your A Fund eventually. You junior guys will get yours next round."

Then 9/11 happened. Sorry about that but you're all furloughed, displaced to other bases and are now commuters, or on reserve. Well, stuff happens. Who could have known.

-- One concessionary contract ago: "They're threatening bankruptcy and they're going to take away the A Fund. Got to protect it for the senior guys, but you get none. No more A Fund at all. But, you junior guys will get yours next round because the senior guys will be retired.

Age 65 passes. You'll all be stagnated for five years, furloughs because no one planned on having these extra pilots. Stuff happens. Who could have known.

-- This concessionary contract: "We've got to strengthen to retirement plan because the senior guys lost so much since the lump sum is now calculated from age 65 instead of age 60; five lost years of annuity equivalency. We'll tweak your pay some, but it won't matter because you're all past those pay scales now anyway."

Merger with UAL. Stuff happens. Who could have known.

-- Next concessionary contract: :The bottom of third of the combined pilot list isn't on the property due to furlough. Let's just rob the junior guys (again) and make whole what we senior guys have lost, lo these many years."

And on it goes.

Twenty years from now today's junior guys will be pulling the same stuff. "Got to be made whole after being robbed all these years." They'll have learned from the masters.

 

[SFR]

Continental Airlines schedules international 2 pilot reserve crews for up to 17:30hrs of duty time, and once you report to the airport your time resets.
Safe?

Got a delay, mx or deicing… Guess what you are still good to go… You would be surprise at how many 18-20 hours duty days 2 pilot reserve crews fly at CAL…

It is the responsibility of both the air carrier and the pilot to prevent fatigue, not only by following the regulations, but also by acting responsibly while serving the traveling public. This means taking into consideration weather conditions, air traffic, the health of each pilot, and any other personal circumstances that may affect a pilot’s performance.

http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=6762

I don't care if CAL gives me a 48 hour duty period. When I get tired, I am fatigued. Period, end of story (it is possible that it could happen in a 5 hour duty period, etc..., but I would not have been prudent in my rest duties if that is the case).

I have no problem calling fatigue if I am truly fatigued. In your story, I probably would be.


No need to complain about it. Simply call fatigued. Beleive me, if pilots do that the long periods like that will stop.

Be sure you are truly fatigued if you do play that card. Don't use it for pride or any other reason.

 

[densoo]

I don't care if CAL gives me a 48 hour duty period. When I get tired, I am fatigued. Period, end of story (it is possible that it could happen in a 5 hour duty period, etc..., but I would not have been prudent in my rest duties if that is the case).

I have no problem calling fatigue if I am truly fatigued. In your story, I probably would be.


No need to complain about it. Simply call fatigued. Beleive me, if pilots do that the long periods like that will stop.

Be sure you are truly fatigued if you do play that card. Don't use it for pride or any other reason.

Fewer pilots will call in fatigued or sick when they're going to lose thousands of dollars by doing so. To think otherwise is simple sticking your head in the sand.

The company can shout as loud as they want about safety and no compromise and will say "safety first" until the congressional hearing, but when they put a disincentive like this in place, there can no surprise to the outcome. See the Colgan accident.

The only solution is to have a limited number no-fault "personal days" like many major companies have. Call in and say you won't be there, no reason necessary, fully pay protected. The incentive to be there when you shouldn't be there will be completely eliminated. No loss of pay, no trip to the CPO.

No company will do this because the MBAs understand motivations--people will work when they shouldn't when you don't pay them--but not safety.

 

[waveflyer]

why I thank god I have left aviation.

This is a shame- good luck QT- but the CAL contract has its most shameful victim- those were good boobs in the flight deck- not saggy old flight attendant boobs only seen for 5 minutes on a restroom break- but consistent semi-permanent boobs- juggling in every ripple of turbulence, swaying with every turn-
forced out by a sh!tty contract that you all hate. Sad. Very sad. Boobs in the flight deck are a good thing- but kudos to those talented and thoughtful enough to get out... Hoping the grass is truly greener, and grateful ...