NJ Recalls

[Blueridgeflyer]

From what I hear of the current lifestyle on the road at NJA, there is no amount of money that would get me to return. Not worth it.

I'm much more interested in QOL issues than pure compensation at this point.

What you've heard is accurate. There is really little QOL that can be had while working 14/10's. this tour has been brutal. I use the fatigue policy when I'm tired. Even with the 14 hr min rest provision after a fatigue call, the current workload required of crew members is simply unsustainable. We had better go hard after lifestyle enhancements in the next CBA. People are wearing out around here quickly.

 

[DC-4]

Couple things, first being that rigby after it says 0 percent selloffs it says that provided the company can selloff a maximum of 11 days per quarter. That is important because later it says if the company sellsoff more than 0 percent then any flying during those 11 days are in the calculation. The union and company both say they are allowed to selloff as many days as they want but 11 triggers recall. If that was the case then why does the cba say maximum. Its honestly rediculas my 9 year old daughter could have written it better.

 

[Rubber Ducky]

Lets say we had an attorney rewrite it so that exceeding ZERO sell offs would trigger recalls but we want to be nice and allow the company to subcontract for a MAXIMUM of 11 days each quarter while we get pilots trained and on line... How would the lawyer reword it? They wouldn't!!!!!! That's what it says!

 

[BeeDubya]

.....

 

[dudemize]

Lets say we had an attorney rewrite it so that exceeding ZERO sell offs would trigger recalls but we want to be nice and allow the company to subcontract for a MAXIMUM of 11 days each quarter while we get pilots trained and on line... How would the lawyer reword it? They wouldn't!!!!!! That's what it says!

Ducky, I'm no lawyer, but what you say makes more a lot more sense to me than the Union and company interpretation. If I was an outsider I would read it as such. I'm assuming the current interpretation is what was intended, but it sure isn't worded that way. I'd be interested to see the interpretive transcripts on Section 1.

 

[rajflyboy]

just recall the 8 guys out of 495 that want to come back and haven't moved on yet

just do it

its the right thing to do

 

[Xcorporate]

just recall the 8 guys out of 495 that want to come back and haven't moved on yet

just do it

its the right thing to do

That's hilarious.

 

[Rubber Ducky]

I agree with both of those posts.

 

[dudemize]

I think this whole Section 1 language debate is wishful thinking for those hoping to be recalled as result of sell-offs. Both the union and company agree on the current interpretation so that is all that matters. I agree with the current interpretation (the company is allowed up 11 days of unlimited sell-offs with no recalls required), but also agree that it could have been worded better in the CBA.

If current business trends continue, I don't see how recalls can be too far off. Busy season will be interesting, although the company doesn't seem too worried about it or else they would have recalled some folks already in order to have them trained up by then.

I will just be an interested bystander as I don't like flying airplanes enough to return to NJA in its present form.

 

[OPECJet]

It's beyond poorly written. It flatly says anything over 0% and there will be recalls. If that's not what was intended, WTF does it say that? I don't expect NJASAP to fight for something unintended, but dammit, get the language right the first time. How much other crap is in there with meaning other than what is written?

Mize, I'd love to avoid going back, but I can't see that happening. Been up for promotions twice since I've been in my current job to have the positions given to me, then taken away. Still making the same paycheck I was back in 2011 when I started save for the 3% COL bumps each year. Then again health insurance just went up 3% so I'm damn near back where I started.