WHAT HAS OUR MEC PRESIDENT DONE TO US NOW

[BoeingBoy]

One thing I do question is the eline we received Sep. 25. In the eline it says "The 24-hour period can be from check-out to check-in either in domicile or on a RON". For some reason I thought that the 24-hour rest had to happen in domicile. Does anyone know for sure?

The FAA doesn't care where you have your "free of duty" period, only that you have it. So anything more restrictive (like being in base) would have to be covered in the contract.

Jim

 

[Snickerdoodles]

The FAA doesn't care where you have your "free of duty" period, only that you have it. So anything more restrictive (like being in base) would have to be covered in the contract.

Jim

From years past we did not receive our 24 hour rest in base. So reserves did fight for the rest to be in base. So I guess the union has decided to go against that practice to protect the ETB. We reserves should not let the union give up our rest in base! That will be a nightmare. Can you see the trips built for this one. 30 hours in MHT and we would be the ones receiving these.

 

[Fu-ManchuStew]

It looks like our eyes have been opened wide to a problem that has been occuring to save money and abuse the very people that have continued to make many sacrifices to keep this Company alive. For whatever reason each of us chose to stay here, be it the money, the life style, the love of flying or just what we have know as part of our life for years. It seems that other issues (F.A.R's) are coming into question. You would think that since 911, safety would continue to be the forefront of everyone's mind. If they are working the RSV F/A's under these conditions, could you imagine a mechanic working on airplanes for 2 weeks straight fourteen hours on duty without a day off?? How do you think the public would respond to these LCC cost cutting measures??

The Company and the Union has created the RSV's having to rely on the ETB on days Off/INV or VAC to make ends meet. They have created this disfunctional lifestyle. There is no reason that any of us should have to give up our personal life or violate an F.A.R to make ends meet. Let's keep this in mind!! Let's make a change - So if any Un. Reps that are working on this issue now is reading these forums listen to the majority of us. Life with this system is not only a violation of a saftey issue it is a personal violation of our time off.

 

[BajaBabe]

:down: :down: :down: :down: I feel for the Reserves because once again you are the Bottom Feeders . You HAVE to rise to the occasion and let the Union know that you will not be treated like a second class f/a. This is just the beginning wait until you see the entire contract that they will bring forward. BURN BABY BURN.

 

[Snickerdoodles]

:down: :down: :down: :down: I feel for the Reserves because once again you are the Bottom Feeders . You HAVE to rise to the occasion and let the Union know that you will not be treated like a second class f/a. This is just the beginning wait until you see the entire contract that they will bring forward. BURN BABY BURN.

BajaBabe you are definitely right. We have been being treated as a new hire flight attendant who is only going to be on reserve for 4 months. We have been on reserve now for some up to what at least 17 years or more. In the past we were convinced of voting for contracts that were going to enhance the system and make more lines for Flight Attendants, etc. etc. Don't know about you, but I know that I will definitely not fall for that one ever again. Right now we all need to stand strong and support the reserves that obviously went to extreme measures to do what the union should have been doing. We should not be fighting about an FAR finally being enforced. The FAA is not trying to screw us they are protecting us and our passengers from fatigued flight attendants. We are here as safety professionals first and foremost. That is the reason and the only reason for the FAR being enforced.

 

[Travelpro72]

Talking to reserves around the airport today and good grief is everyone blinded. All they are talking about is how they are screwed with this new rule. NOBODY sees that this is something that is a legality at ALL carriers here in the USA. This screwing up the ability for a reserve to pick up trips just shows that the system needs to change NOW and not in an upcoming agreement. LTO/ETB and this new restriction just DOES NOT go hand in hand. Ok, we as reserves AND THERE ARE MANY need to find a way to band together and get some changes NOW. I say STOP the ETB flying and let the company see that that time needs to go back into open time/AIL and let the reserves fly for their time and not sit like pigeons in a park waiting for bread. It's horrible. Just be a b/h in a crowded crew room and ask, "Who wants a 2day". It's like I do, I do, I do.... it's horrible and pathetic. We should not have to live like this. No chance of a YES vote if there is ANYTHING that makes a reserves life harder. I don't wanna hear about givebacks either.

 

[Fu-ManchuStew]

Talking to reserves around the airport today and good grief is everyone blinded. All they are talking about is how they are screwed with this new rule. NOBODY sees that this is something that is a legality at ALL carriers here in the USA. This screwing up the ability for a reserve to pick up trips just shows that the system needs to change NOW and not in an upcoming agreement. LTO/ETB and this new restriction just DOES NOT go hand in hand. Ok, we as reserves AND THERE ARE MANY need to find a way to band together and get some changes NOW. I say STOP the ETB flying and let the company see that that time needs to go back into open time/AIL and let the reserves fly for their time and not sit like pigeons in a park waiting for bread. It's horrible. Just be a b/h in a crowded crew room and ask, "Who wants a 2day". It's like I do, I do, I do.... it's horrible and pathetic. We should not have to live like this. No chance of a YES vote if there is ANYTHING that makes a reserves life harder. I don't wanna hear about givebacks either.




You are absolutely right. Wake up people! I think that this F.A.R has been turned into an ETB nightmare. This is a safety issue that all of us has been in violation of! It is no different than any of us deciding not to carry our emergency manual to work and hoping not to get caught. The very people that are complaing the most are the ones that do not want to work on their days on call but want to work on all OFF/INV days. They try to get their LTO up in the beginning of the month to avoid future/daily calls on duty days and then work the ETB. Just ask them, most of them will tell you this. At least in the larger bases where it can be done because of adequate RSV coverage. Is this fair or the right mentality?? This is just another way that I feel we have been taken advantage of and screwed once again by Management? The Co. did not take money from us this time around but they have managed to find a way to work us overtime illegaly. :down:

 

[Lovethesun]

Fokes, RESERVES, I would like to say that it is definitely time that we stand up and finish getting our voices heard. Lets show the union and the company that we are not going to be abused anymore. Our union has know about this now for 3 years!!! If anyone doubts it call the FAA and find out. This is definitely misrepresentation on the part of the union. What else is the union letting slide by? I know that I pay dues each month and expect to be represented the same as blockholders. MF has known about this ruling now since he took office as CLT LEC Pres and has been turning his head to this!! The union and the company knew about this long before ETB ever came to be!!! The union should not allow our 24 hour break to be out of base!!! We fought too hard for this to be practice and now the union is just going to waive it to help the company. The union has tried saying that they are doing all of this to protect us but who needs this kind of protection. If I wanted to be mauled I would step into a Lions cage. That would not cost me $39 a month to do. I know that $39 might not seem much to some, but to some of us that is alot! I expect to be fully represented!!!!! I do not believe that we have been receiving the services that we deserve. I want my 24 hour break to be in base!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[IMisstheAladdinTrays]

Fokes, RESERVES, I would like to say that it is definitely time that we stand up and finish getting our voices heard. Lets show the union and the company that we are not going to be abused anymore. Our union has know about this now for 3 years!!! If anyone doubts it call the FAA and find out. This is definitely misrepresentation on the part of the union. What else is the union letting slide by? I know that I pay dues each month and expect to be represented the same as blockholders. MF has known about this ruling now since he took office as CLT LEC Pres and has been turning his head to this!! The union and the company knew about this long before ETB ever came to be!!! The union should not allow our 24 hour break to be out of base!!! We fought too hard for this to be practice and now the union is just going to waive it to help the company. The union has tried saying that they are doing all of this to protect us but who needs this kind of protection. If I wanted to be mauled I would step into a Lions cage. That would not cost me $39 a month to do. I know that $39 might not seem much to some, but to some of us that is alot! I expect to be fully represented!!!!! I do not believe that we have been receiving the services that we deserve. I want my 24 hour break to be in base!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Me too!!! I know it has to be IN BASE for the Pilots! Also how can we be on call 24 hours a day now? That is since being "on call" now counts as duty...I don't think the FAR's allow 24 hour duty days!

 

[PITbull]

Talking to reserves around the airport today and good grief is everyone blinded. All they are talking about is how they are screwed with this new rule. NOBODY sees that this is something that is a legality at ALL carriers here in the USA. This screwing up the ability for a reserve to pick up trips just shows that the system needs to change NOW and not in an upcoming agreement. LTO/ETB and this new restriction just DOES NOT go hand in hand. Ok, we as reserves AND THERE ARE MANY need to find a way to band together and get some changes NOW. I say STOP the ETB flying and let the company see that that time needs to go back into open time/AIL and let the reserves fly for their time and not sit like pigeons in a park waiting for bread. It's horrible. Just be a b/h in a crowded crew room and ask, "Who wants a 2day". It's like I do, I do, I do.... it's horrible and pathetic. We should not have to live like this. No chance of a YES vote if there is ANYTHING that makes a reserves life harder. I don't wanna hear about givebacks either.

You see, the company has brainwashed the employees that in order to have a livable wage, one needs to work 31 days a month. This way, the company didn't have to hire, and folks had to chase their pay by flying constantly and forever! Now that this FAA regulation is being enforced, those comotose f/as are screaming they've been screwed by the FAA.

Geezus people...get your head out of your azzzes.


HAS ANY RESERVE APPROACHED THEIR LECP AND ASKED TO NEGOTIATE AN INCREASE IN MIN. GUARANTEE??? LIKE TO 78 HOURS??? BY THE RESERVES TAKING UNSCHEDULED DH PAID ABOVE GUARANTEE, THEY'D BE OVER 80-85 IN NO TIME! THEN, MAYBE SOME OF YOU CAN CONTINUE EDUCATION, TAKE A DECENT SECOND JOB ON YOUR OFF DAYS THAT ALLOWS YOU TO STAY HOME AND SLEEP IN YOUR OWN BEDS AND USE YOUR OWN TOILET, TAKE A VACATION!

A line holder who does not fly; does not receive pay. There is no guarantee for a lineholder. The average line in a base is 83 hours. A lineholder who can't drop a trip, or pick up a trip from ETB can NOT go above their line block hours unless they had been "red circled" as 105 and pick up a trip off the bid sheet (only those that are red circled from 2005.

 

[Lovethesun]

You see, the company has brainwashed the employees that in order to have a livable wage, one needs to work 31 days a month. Now that this FAA regulation is being enforced, those comotose f/as are screaming they've been screwed by the FAA.

Geezus people...get your head out of your azzzes.


HAS ANY RESERVE APPROACHED THEIR LECP AND ASKED TO NEGOTIATE AN INCREASE IN MIN. GUARANTEE??? LIKE TO 78 HOURS??? BY THE RESERVES TAKING UNSCHEDULED DH PAID ABOVE GUARANTEE, THEY'D BE OVER 80-85 IN NO TIME! THEN, MAYBE SOME OF YOU CAN CONTINUE EDUCATION, TAKE A DECENT SECOND JOB ON YOUR OFF DAYS THAT ALLOWS YOU TO STAY HOME AND SLEEP IN YOUR OWN BEDS AND USE YOUR OWN TOILET, TAKE A VACATION!

A line holder who does not fly; does not receive pay. There is no guarantee for a lineholder. The average line in a base is 83 hours. A lineholder who can't drop a trip, or pick up a trip from ETB can NOT go above their line block hours unless they had been "red circled" as 105 and pick up a trip of the bid sheet (only those that are red circled from 2005.




PITBULL, yes many reserves have approached their LEC's over numerous things with regards to negotations and what we want. Unfortunately it is falling on deaf ears. The union has known about the 24 and 7 now for 3 years. That includes when you were in office! You were our MECP how could you let this just go! Why would you do that to us? Our union and you have let us down. Do not act like you did not know about this long ago. The fact that you want us to believe that you were shocked to hear the ruling from MF is unacceptable and unbelievable. The FAA ruled on this 3 years ago not yesterday and not a month ago, but 3 years ago. Something could have been done then. Maybe this crappy LTO system would not have been put into place. For this union to ignore this ruling from the FAA years ago is just mind boggling. So please do not start with what you feel we should be approaching our LEC's with because you were once representing us and allowing this practice to continue. I would never have dreamed that you would not have stood up for us.

 

[PITbull]

lovethesun,

NO! THE FAA DID NOT GIVE A RULING ON THE INTERPRETATION OF THE REGULATION THREE YEARS AGO or even years ago as you posted!!! you are incorrect. It was brought to the FAA; they did not rule until April 2005, and I found out and got to read the ruling last month. I don't believe ANYONE on the MEC knew about this ruling before last month..that includes Mike F and any officer. I do suspect that AFA International must have known for the past year. The FAA would have contacted the International on this at least in a letter along with ALPA and any union that represents flight crews.

I have nothing to gain or lose whether I convince you or not.

As I had said, I did know about the 24/7 and that the company MAYBE misinterpreting the regulation. According to the International, the FAA would not take a stand on the interpretation, THEREFORE, A GRIEVANCE WAS NOT AN OPTION AS THIS WAS INDUSTRY WIDE.YOU and those that think with such small minds would NOT COMPREHEND EVEN IF THIS WAS EXPLAINED IN PERSON 5,000 TIMES.

And, where were you with this issue? How long have you been a f/a???? Did you approach anyone on your knowledge of the issue, what was your discussion and with whom and when??? Or, are you going to say you didn't know anything way back when...

Please explain on this board how you would have mandated your thinking of this interpretation??? and if your interpretation would have caused f/as to be discipline and terminated WOULD THAT BEEN ACCEPTABLE TO THOSE WHO WOULD HAVE BEEN TERMINATED????

and, what if your interpretation were wrong??? What if the FAA ruled that "on duty" and "on call" are completely different??? Is that a risk anyone was willing to take???

What then????? I surely had no definitive on it not by the MEC, the BOD or International. Being an airline in BK for the past 3 years, I was surely not going to act solo on a damn hunch that the ariline was misinterpreting the reg... creating more terminations and add to the 6,500 f/as who were already GONE specifically when the company was looking to lose employees anyway they could!!!!

 

[N109UW]

I think having the 24 hour break during your trip is weak. We did have that changed years ago, so we had to have the break in base. I have heard that MF has allowed that to be during the trip again. When I took a trip recently, the scheduler said she didn't understand how this break could be during a trip, as we were still getting paid per diem, on company time(meaning, not free and clear of any duty). I have a number for a cabin safety specialist with the FAA. I am going to call her about this and get her imput. I'll let you know what she says and how we are going to handle this.

 

[IMisstheAladdinTrays]

I think having the 24 hour break during your trip is weak. We did have that changed years ago, so we had to have the break in base. I have heard that MF has allowed that to be during the trip again. When I took a trip recently, the scheduler said she didn't understand how this break could be during a trip, as we were still getting paid per diem, on company time(meaning, not free and clear of any duty). I have a number for a cabin safety specialist with the FAA. I am going to call her about this and get her imput. I'll let you know what she says and how we are going to handle this.

Hey ask here about us being "On Call" 24 hours a a day 6 days a week!

 

[N109UW]

Hey ask here about us being "On Call" 24 hours a a day 6 days a week!

No problem, I'll add that to it. Anymore concerns? Enough, is enough. That's my new motto. Time, RSV's start pushing back.