Bob is it possible the company agrees but wants something in exchange? What is it that triggered the sudden change of policy here?
No, they didnt even respond to it, acted as if we didnt even put it in there. When challenged they simply responded "We like it the way it is".
The proposal was inspired by the Continental language, we never had it before so we werent going to get tangled up in it. Didnt want to give the company yet another month to drag things out.
Continental has it in their contract that they can do back to back doubles.
The policy change covers everyone under Devalle, not aircarft maint so far, as I see it those stations that have back to back doubles should still have them unless Jim Ream puts out a letter stating otherwise. We havent had back to back doubles in Maint for years in New York (except on Field trips of course where we stay on the clock till we get back or we won't go). Cobbett banned back to backs out of spite because he couldnt stand us. He wanted the Wallen Report, his MO was take something away then demand something else in return for it. He was told he could keep his back to backs. Guys were able to work around it.
As far as what triggered it maybe in fleet they realize that they have a lot of guys that hardly ever work yet they are paying for their benefits and the guys that work all the extra hours are getting hurt too much due to wear and tear. Its a hard job crawling around in those bellies.
I took full advantage of the CS's before taking office. Saved me 40% on my commuting costs and I could put in two full days work on the other job and still be off the weekends. It was rough working 17hrs(6am to 11pm), then going home sleeping for 4 and a half hours (one hour commute each way) then going back but it allowed me to pay the bills and put the wife through school, sort of, I still went into debt.
The best thing the company could do from a Union perspective is crack down on the CS's, that would force the guys to fight back. The liberal CS policy in many stations keeps the place running because many treat this as their second job and do what they can to get the plane off the gate so they can kick back and watch the giant flat screen TVs the company bought for the ready rooms. The last thing many of these guys want to do is find something that will keep them working till punch out time then have to drag themselves to their other job exhausted. If the company eliminates their ability to work the second job they have no choice but to get more money from this one, or quit, so they would lose their most motivated gate clearers either way. Working OT is easier than working two jobs and there aren't that many second jobs that pay $45/hr. Guys may realize that OT is a better deal, even better than doubles (stay four hours and get six hours pay vs stay 8.5 extra hours for 8 hours pay, pull down 3 OT a week and get 18 hours extra pay for just 12 hours invested vs putting in 17 extra hours for 16 hrs pay). They may look a little harder and follow the company's word about "Verbatum".
For years the company has told us how the passengers just click on the cheapest fare, so trying to appeal to guys who are trying to survive after losing half their real income, and now taking away their ability to make up for that loss with their second job, about how he is ruining someones vacation by not hustling to get that plane out isnt going to motivate too many people. Response would probably be that they should have chosen Southwest, an airline that knows how to pay their mechanics!
