Skywest, Sapa and pressuring pilots to fly

[PCL_128]

No, the membership does NOT vote for the MEC (Master executive council). They are elected by the various LEC's (local executive councils).

Not true. The MEC is made up of two groups of members: the MEC Officers (Chair, Vice-Chair, Sec-Treasurer) and the MEC Members. The MEC Officers have no votes on the MEC, and are basically there to serve the purpose of running the union on a day-to-day basis. They are elected by the Members of the MEC. Whenever decisions are made, they are made by the MEC Members, not the Officers. The MEC Members are elected by the pilots, because the Members are made up of the Status Reps that you elect at your LECs. Any votes on the MEC are only made by these guys. The Officers that aren't elected by the pilots don't get any votes.

The LEC's lend themselves to cronyism by a percentage based voting system. The bigger the base, the "more" a LEC members vote counts. And here's the kicker . . .they can "split" their vote, i.e. 60% of their vote for one guy, 30% for another, 10% for one more. This way they can look "impartial" and still let their bud of 15 years stay in the MEC chair.

Again, not true. Article IV, Section 5 of the Constitution and By-Laws prohibits MEC Members from using a roll-call vote for election of Officers. Roll call votes are allowed on other issues, but Officer elections only allow one vote for each Member.

 

[PCL_128]

ALPA IS bad at Mesa, so yes, you shouldn't work at Mesa and expect them to do anything other than take your money and tell you they can't do anything about your crummy airline.

So if you thought the union was so bad at MAG, did you get involved to improve it? Did you run for office? Did you chair an important committee?

 

[Soverytired]

So if you thought the union was so bad at MAG, did you get involved to improve it? Did you run for office? Did you chair an important committee?

Arrrghhhh!!!!! This "reasoning" drives me nuts. All good that ALPA does is because of our national unity, brotherhood and power. All bad things that happen at Mesa ALPA are the fault of the membership not getting involved enough.

Neat trick, eh? I forked over $10k, but that apparently wasn't enough for and ALPA laywer and a union rep when I really needed it. But that's my fault, because I didn't "volunteer".

Look, I voted against the TA, and was DYING to hit a picket line and strike.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Soverytired... you just got schooled.

Looks like you don't take responsibility for your career. I am sure you are a great pilot. You study the FARs/AIM/COM/AFM etc... you know your stuff....when it comes to flying..

But when it comes to career management it seems you don't spend much time, yet this is where your career earnings, quality of life and retirement all come into play..

Why would you do that?

 

[Soverytired]

Not true. The MEC is made up of two groups of members: the MEC Officers (Chair, Vice-Chair, Sec-Treasurer) and the MEC Members. The MEC Officers have no votes on the MEC, and are basically there to serve the purpose of running the union on a day-to-day basis. They are elected by the Members of the MEC. Whenever decisions are made, they are made by the MEC Members, not the Officers. The MEC Members are elected by the pilots, because the Members are made up of the Status Reps that you elect at your LECs. Any votes on the MEC are only made by these guys. The Officers that aren't elected by the pilots don't get any votes.

Again, not true. Article IV, Section 5 of the Constitution and By-Laws prohibits MEC Members from using a roll-call vote for election of Officers. Roll call votes are allowed on other issues, but Officer elections only allow one vote for each Member.

Let's keep this simple:

1. Who votes in the MEC president. A direct vote from the membership, or someone else?

2. MEC officer elections are one member-one vote (I didn't know that). But it IS accurate to say that on pretty much every other issue the LEC's get a secret ballot by which they can split up their representational votes however they want?

----->That's nice . . . because when you ask your LEC why something passed or failed, they can truthfully say they both voted for and against it? This seems reasonable to you?

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Arrrghhhh!!!!! This "reasoning" drives me nuts. All good that ALPA does is because of our national unity, brotherhood and power. All bad things that happen at Mesa ALPA are the fault of the membership not getting involved enough.

Neat trick, eh? I forked over $10k, but that apparently wasn't enough for and ALPA laywer and a union rep when I really needed it. But that's my fault, because I didn't "volunteer".

Look, I voted against the TA, and was DYING to hit a picket line and strike.

Sovertyired.... you don't need to run for office your volunteer, but at least you need to be informed and educated... and you've shown that you aren't up to speed as you should be...

 

[Soverytired]

Soverytired... you just got schooled.

Looks like you don't take responsibility for your career. I am sure you are a great pilot. You study the FARs/AIM/COM/AFM etc... you know your stuff....when it comes to flying..

But when it comes to career management it seems you don't spend much time, yet this is where your career earnings, quality of life and retirement all come into play..

Why would you do that?

Thanks for the concern. I put my money where my mouth is and took a job at a non-ALPA carrier. And I can assure you, if and when the union vote ever comes, it ain't gonna be ALPA.

PCL educates, but he avoids the main issue at hand, which is that the MEC president ISN'T elected by the membership... making him very difficult to remove. The LEC officers can split their votes on MOST issues, effectively voting both FOR and AGAINST the same items on a ballot.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Thanks for the concern. I put my money where my mouth is and took a job at a non-ALPA carrier. And I can assure you, if and when the union vote ever comes, it ain't gonna be ALPA.

PCL educates, but he avoids the main issue at hand, which is that the MEC president ISN'T elected by the membership... making him very difficult to remove. The LEC officers can split their votes on MOST issues, effectively voting both FOR and AGAINST the same items on a ballot.

There is a reason why the membership doesn't elect the president. Just as you didn't know how the organizational structure doesn't work..so do most of the members. Sorry to say it but to put that much responsibility into the membership would reckless. Maybe when the membership get more involved and educated. In fact i think a mature and repsonsible membership would have the skill set to change the Bylaws to allow just that...

 

[PCL_128]

1. Who votes in the MEC president. A direct vote from the membership, or someone else?

There's no such thing as an MEC "president." If we're going to debate the structure of a union, let's at least get the terminology right. I assume you're referring to the MEC Chairman, who is one of the MEC Officers that I discussed earlier. He is elected by the Status Reps that make up the Members of the MEC. Each status rep gets only one vote.

However, your focus on the MEC Chairman is misplaced, and demonstrates that you lack some understanding as to how ALPA functions. The Master Chairman is mostly a figurehead at the MEC level. He is more important at the National level where he sits on the Executive Board, but at the MEC level he has very little power. He's great for going around and making speeches, sending out press releases, and being the most visible element of the MEC leadership, but he has very little real power. Everything that the Master Chairman does is directed by the MEC Members, and they are elected by you.

2. MEC officer elections are one member-one vote (I didn't know that). But it IS accurate to say that on pretty much every other issue the LEC's get a secret ballot by which they can split up their representational votes however they want?

No, that's also incorrect. If a Member of the MEC requests a roll call ballot on an issue (which has to be done to split up a vote), then that roll call vote is prohibited from being a secret ballot. You can reference Article VI, Section 5, Paragraph 2 in the Constitution & ByLaws for that. Any roll call ballot is listed in the meeting minutes along with how many votes each Member cast.

 

[PCL_128]

Neat trick, eh? I forked over $10k, but that apparently wasn't enough for and ALPA laywer and a union rep when I really needed it. But that's my fault, because I didn't "volunteer".

Look, if you want to attack the union structure at Mesa, then I find it hypocritical if you didn't get involved to change it for the better. Your $10k is only the beginning of your responsibilities to the Association and the profession. You are also responsible for being informed, and taking action if you feel that something isn't right. Sitting back and attacking the Association while refusing to do anything about it doesn't make much sense.

Look, I voted against the TA, and was DYING to hit a picket line and strike.

That's wonderful, but a majority of your fellow pilots disagreed with you. Your issue seems to be with democracy.

 

[Long Time Gone]

This may have already been covered (since I didn't read all 5 pages), but this.......

Standard Practice 316:2:a states that “Crewmembers will be subject to Federal Aviation Regulations regarding duty and crew rest requirements. Additionally, Pilots will not be scheduled for duty time that exceeds fourteen hours per duty day period without his/her consent. Flight Attendants may not be scheduled for more than fourteen hours.”.

....doesn't mean that if your duty day goes over 14 hours that your scheduling department is supposed to remove trips from your day or "notify" you that you may go over 14 hours.

We had received no call from crew scheduling inquiring about the exceedance of 14 hours so I called to let them know that we were going to exceed this policy manual time limitation..”

Your friend's day in no way "exceed(ed) this policy manual limitation". That policy means that no trip pairings will be originally scheduled to exceed 14 hours of duty per day. This does not stop the crew from having to exceed this themselves due to operational delays. The amount of duty time you can actually have per day is based on your prior duty day, prior duty rest, and subsequent required rest after the current duty day per FAA regulations.

....without his/her consent.

This only means that a scheduled pairing or rescheduled (adjusted) pairing will not exceed 14 hours of duty unless the crewmember agrees to it. During IROPS, this doesn't apply, unless the pairing is modified for a different destination. If all original destinations are on the pairing throughout the entire duty day, it's not a reschedule, even if proposed departure times are changed.

Sounds like your friend almost bit himself and his crew in the butt. Granted, fatigued is exactly that.....fatigued. However, just because he didn't want to fly a 16 hour duty day isn't fatigued. He'd have an uphill battle with that one, unless he had a previous 16 hour duty day. Then again, in that case, he would have only had 8 hours reduced rest, which would have required 10 hours of compensatory rest, meaning a 14 hour legal (FAA, not Skywest legal) duty day.

New captain or not, learn it. Even as an FO. If you don't understand the regulations and policies, it's not difficult to find someone who does. Sounds like the crew made the right decision to fly the rest of the day.

Granted, having ALPA on the property would have prevented this whole situation.

 

[120% Torque]

This may have already been covered (since I didn't read all 5 pages), but this.......

[/size][/font][/size][/font]

....doesn't mean that if your duty day goes over 14 hours that your scheduling department is supposed to remove trips from your day or "notify" you that you may go over 14 hours.




Your friend's day in no way "exceed(ed) this policy manual limitation". That policy means that no trip pairings will be originally scheduled to exceed 14 hours of duty per day. This does not stop the crew from having to exceed this themselves due to operational delays. The amount of duty time you can actually have per day is based on your prior duty day, prior duty rest, and subsequent required rest after the current duty day per FAA regulations.

[/size][/font][/size][/font]

This only means that a scheduled pairing or rescheduled (adjusted) pairing will not exceed 14 hours of duty unless the crewmember agrees to it. During IROPS, this doesn't apply, unless the pairing is modified for a different destination. If all original destinations are on the pairing throughout the entire duty day, it's not a reschedule, even if proposed departure times are changed.

Sounds like your friend almost bit himself and his crew in the butt. Granted, fatigued is exactly that.....fatigued. However, just because he didn't want to fly a 16 hour duty day isn't fatigued. He'd have an uphill battle with that one, unless he had a previous 16 hour duty day. Then again, in that case, he would have only had 8 hours reduced rest, which would have required 10 hours of compensatory rest, meaning a 14 hour legal (FAA, not Skywest legal) duty day.

New captain or not, learn it. Even as an FO. If you don't understand the regulations and policies, it's not difficult to find someone who does. Sounds like the crew made the right decision to fly the rest of the day.

Granted, having ALPA on the property would have prevented this whole situation.

Thanks for the dissection of policy. Not sure I agree with your interpretation of the 14 hour notification but then again you will find that a majority of policy at skywest is written vaguely on purpose. Regarding my friend "almost biting himself in the butt" and "sounds like the crew made the right decision to fly the rest of the day" I would dissagree. I think the key overriding word that makes all the rest of this less important is that he told a crew scheduler and system chief pilot he and the crew were "fatigued". The correct answer from the both should have been "Go home" period. The correct course of action for the captain would to repeat that he and his crew were fatigued and to call in sick if or whatever it took to start the process of another crew finishing.

Fatigued is fatigued. My friend actually risked more by doing what he did. If something went awry, the FAA would have cooked him and the company would have looked the other way. One other thing, the captain brought up the fact that with weather, he and his crew were in jeapardy of going over 16 hours on the last round trip. He ended up finishing exactly at 16 hours. Two other things almost happend. 1. A grounded flight in JAC with the company footing the bill for hotels (assuming the company then decided to to the right thing) 2. Exceedance of 16 hours knowing it would likely happen. Again putting my friends ticket in jeapardy while the company looked the other way.

We do agree on one thing however, with Alpa on the property a new captain would not have been put into this precarious position to the extent that he was nor felt so pressured that day to finish, Alpa giving him the peace of mind that somebody has got his back to the nth degree.

 

[Long Time Gone]

I agree that "fatigued" is exactly that. However, there has to be justification for using "fatigued". If there wasn't, then anytime someone didn't want to fly and wasn't sick, they could call "fatigued". I'm not arguing with you on that, believe me.

The 14 hour rule in your SPs is only for scheduling or rescheduling, just as in ASA's contract. You can by all means work up to 16 hours, regardless of what the scheduling policy is. You're not being scheduled or rescheduled to work more than that of the policy. An IROPS situation does not constitute being rescheduled, unless you are being sent to a different destination than what was originally on your schedule when you dutied in that day. Once Crew Scheduling changes a destination in your schedule, now it is a reschedule, and the 14 hour rule once again applies. If they need to reschedule you for more than 14 hours (extension, change in destination, etc.), then Crew Scheduling needs to ask the crew if they wish to do so. If the answer is no, there should be no penalty.

As far as your friend flying exactly 16 hours is concerned, I agree that there should have been more discretion from the company.

Unfortunately, even with a union, ASA's Crew Scheduling department wastes millions of dollars a year also. The advantage is that the money usually goes to the pilots due to screw ups in schedules. Our contract states that if it is on our schedule, whether legal or not and whether we do it or not, we get paid for it. I've made out quite a few times due to this.

If SKW's 14 hour policy were as you interpret it, then no one would ever fly 16 hour days there. There's nothing in the quote from the SPs that states that you must be "notified" if your duty day will exceed 14 hours once you begin it.

 

[120% Torque]

I agree that "fatigued" is exactly that. However, there has to be justification for using "fatigued". If there wasn't, then anytime someone didn't want to fly and wasn't sick, they could call "fatigued". I'm not arguing with you on that, believe me.

The 14 hour rule in your SPs is only for scheduling or rescheduling, just as in ASA's contract. You can by all means work up to 16 hours, regardless of what the scheduling policy is. You're not being scheduled or rescheduled to work more than that of the policy. An IROPS situation does not constitute being rescheduled, unless you are being sent to a different destination than what was originally on your schedule when you dutied in that day. Once Crew Scheduling changes a destination in your schedule, now it is a reschedule, and the 14 hour rule once again applies. If they need to reschedule you for more than 14 hours (extension, change in destination, etc.), then Crew Scheduling needs to ask the crew if they wish to do so. If the answer is no, there should be no penalty.

As far as your friend flying exactly 16 hours is concerned, I agree that there should have been more discretion from the company.

Unfortunately, even with a union, ASA's Crew Scheduling department wastes millions of dollars a year also. The advantage is that the money usually goes to the pilots due to screw ups in schedules. Our contract states that if it is on our schedule, whether legal or not and whether we do it or not, we get paid for it. I've made out quite a few times due to this.

If SKW's 14 hour policy were as you interpret it, then no one would ever fly 16 hour days there. There's nothing in the quote from the SPs that states that you must be "notified" if your duty day will exceed 14 hours once you begin it.

Ive seen it interpreted and had it along with similar policies applied to me sundries different ways at skywest. I believe it is as you say at ASA. Regarding my friend, he and his crew were fatigued, he told the company he and his crew were fatigued, the company did the wrong thing in pressuring him to fly. He made the wrong decision to continue, something he admits later with more experience he would do differently now.

 

[Long Time Gone]

Agreed. Take care.