9E, XJ, 9L JCBA - Think it'll pass?

This is kinda what I'm seeing on our side of the operation. Most of the people that are outspoken "no" voters are actually the senior crowd. They've all got a myriad of different reasons, and some of those reasons (like vacation slide) were even gone in TA1.....yet, they were all for TA1. I guess they were cool with getting bent over it it meant that we were only getting bent over by Pinnacle Inc. Toss Mesaba and Colgan into the mix, and now they're convinced we're going to get bent over by all three. Some of these guys are the same ones that said "Vote yes on TA1, 'cause we won't see anything better." Now that we DO have something better.....they're saying "vote no." I got in a discussion with one guy that was saying the new TA allows them to use CVRs to reprimand us. I had to remind that would be a violation of the FARs. He still wasn't convinced. 'Course it was a "Heard it from someone who heard it from someone else" deal, and when I asked him for a specific section, he said "It's in there somewhere."
 
Yeh, I heard the CVR thing.. That started from some senior MSP Captain, from what I heard..

It was soo outrageous I didn't even post it on the company board.. ;)
 
kellwolf said:
This is kinda what I'm seeing on our side of the operation. Most of the people that are outspoken "no" voters are actually the senior crowd. They've all got a myriad of different reasons, and some of those reasons (like vacation slide) were even gone in TA1.....yet, they were all for TA1. I guess they were cool with getting bent over it it meant that we were only getting bent over by Pinnacle Inc. Toss Mesaba and Colgan into the mix, and now they're convinced we're going to get bent over by all three. Some of these guys are the same ones that said "Vote yes on TA1, 'cause we won't see anything better." Now that we DO have something better.....they're saying "vote no." I got in a discussion with one guy that was saying the new TA allows them to use CVRs to reprimand us. I had to remind that would be a violation of the FARs. He still wasn't convinced. 'Course it was a "Heard it from someone who heard it from someone else" deal, and when I asked him for a specific section, he said "It's in there somewhere."
Click to expand...

check out page 26.10-26.11 z.4.b specifically
 
kellwolf said:
I don't care.


So, uh, with the upgrade and going to DTW.....who's gonna be the MEM FO rep? :)
Click to expand...

MEM is in a weird position since the Sec-Tres will be the MEC VC shortly and the CA rep got displaced to the "heavy, Int'l" side and now I will (hopefully) be in DTW in the left seat. I think the plan is to do council bypass until the joint elections start. That would only be a couple months. Once we have an Sli MEM, DTW, and MSP will be having new base elections to have 1 single set of reps. I have made it abundantly clear that once I upgrade I won't be doing a rep spot. That was a promise to my wife.

It's time to pass on the torch to the next guy. Now who will do it? That's the question. All the candidates that I thought would be good (and wanted to do it) were either displaced or have gone to upgrade so we are scouting out new people at the moment.
 
WIPilot said:
check out page 26.10-26.11 z.4.b specifically
Click to expand...

Yes, that language is in there, but ONLY as a backstop to our FOQA program. Our FOQA program stipulates that ALL DATA is FOQA data and is under the safety program. The "Use of Recorded Data" section is ONLY in the contract as a backstop so that if our FOQA program goes away we still have at least some contractual protections.
 
CAPIP1998 said:
Yes, that language is in there, but ONLY as a backstop to our FOQA program. Our FOQA program stipulates that ALL DATA is FOQA data and is under the safety program. The "Use of Recorded Data" section is ONLY in the contract as a backstop so that if our FOQA program goes away we still have at least some contractual protections.
Click to expand...

does it specify that somewhere else in the contract?
 
CAPIP1998 said:
Yes, that language is in there, but ONLY as a backstop to our FOQA program. Our FOQA program stipulates that ALL DATA is FOQA data and is under the safety program. The "Use of Recorded Data" section is ONLY in the contract as a backstop so that if our FOQA program goes away we still have at least some contractual protections.
Click to expand...

If you keep reading further in that section, I can see where the conspiracy theorists are getting it. If the company gets an "identified, unsolicited" report (which the conspiracy theorists are gonna count the nervous flier in seat 2A as one of those sources), then they can investigate. However, if you're not violating the FARs or the CFM, the company can investigate all they want and waste their time. Bottom line: don't be stupid. Odds of this section even coming into play are astronomically slim.
 
higney85 said:
MEM is in a weird position since the Sec-Tres will be the MEC VC shortly and the CA rep got displaced to the "heavy, Int'l" side and now I will (hopefully) be in DTW in the left seat. I think the plan is to do council bypass until the joint elections start. That would only be a couple months. Once we have an Sli MEM, DTW, and MSP will be having new base elections to have 1 single set of reps. I have made it abundantly clear that once I upgrade I won't be doing a rep spot. That was a promise to my wife.
Click to expand...


It's also gonna be interesting to see what JFK looks like after the combined list. I could see them combining JFK with the LGA Saabs and EWR for a DTW sized council. Makes more sense than having the ATL chief pilot and DTW reps.
 
kellwolf said:
It's also gonna be interesting to see what JFK looks like after the combined list. I could see them combining JFK with the LGA Saabs and EWR for a DTW sized council. Makes more sense than having the ATL chief pilot and DTW reps.
Click to expand...

Anyone would be lucky not to have the ATL domicile management... the CP and BM are not exactly employee-friendly...
 
jynxyjoe said:
Actually I was taking time to jab jersey because he couldn't vote. Since he can't vote he shouldn't bitch, but he does anyway, etc etc etc. So I was using jrsy to provide a point that if you don't vote you will still and can bitch.
Click to expand...

I can't vote??? :dunno: News to me. Maybe you mean I can't vote again??
 
jynxyjoe said:
Actually I was taking time to jab jersey because he couldn't vote. Since he can't vote he shouldn't bitch, but he does anyway, etc etc etc. So I was using jrsy to provide a point that if you don't vote you will still and can bitch.
Click to expand...

JrsyGuy said:
I can't vote??? :dunno: News to me. Maybe you mean I can't vote again??
Click to expand...

Joe, it's only a 6 month probation at Colgan. Jersey's off probation. Besides, he damn well better vote considering how much time I spent talking to him at the roadshows!
 
Tram said:
Nevermind.... :)
Click to expand...

This is good news man! Maybe we're looking at a complete turn around, next thing you know he'll be the grievance rep giving a billion hours of his free time to help out pilots ENFORCING the contract.

We could call him the "enforcer"! And I will be "Monkey, King of the Saab"!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top