WHAT HAS OUR MEC PRESIDENT DONE TO US NOW

[IMisstheAladdinTrays]

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

Perhaps we should think about some type of Civil action against the company and the union! For knowingly forcing us to break a Federal Regulation!

 

[justanadd]

the FAR was bring broken by others besides US.

The former union for NW flight attendants requested a ruling on this from the FAA and that is how this has effected reserves at all airlines. Proir to this ruling, at NW the company didnt start the 24/7 clock ticking until a reserve was assigned a trip saving them from giving reserves a day off after 6 days on call. I don't know what US is doing but know at NW no reserves are allowed to schedule themselves for more than 6 days on call.

 

[TheNewLowFare]

IN the West, we can have our 24 hour break on our overnight if you are a block-holder, but we have to specify it when we do our bids. If you are reserve, you can't.

I agree, reserve system needs to change in the whole system.

 

[Lovethesun]

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!!!!

Pitbull tell you what. Will give you the number for you to call and ask the FAA yourself who knew that this was suppose to have been enforced 3 years ago. Cheez can not believe you with the way you look at things legally would not have realized that this was not an opinion that this was a ruling by the FAA. This number will be for anyone to call and ask for yourselves about this situation. Our former MEC Safety Chair new of this and I know of others. Would you like the number to call? Be glad to supply it. Got it off of the FAA website.

 

[IMisstheAladdinTrays]

Pitbull tell you what. Will give you the number for you to call and ask the FAA yourself who knew that this was suppose to have been enforced 3 years ago. Cheez can not believe you with the way you look at things legally would not have realized that this was not an opinion that this was a ruling by the FAA. This number will be for anyone to call and ask for yourselves about this situation. Our former MEC Safety Chair new of this and I know of others. Would you like the number to call? Be glad to supply it. Got it off of the FAA website.

I know of a person who brought this to the attention of the Union long ago and was told that she was wrong about the company violating this FAR! And this is first had information!

 

[Fu-ManchuStew]

Perhaps we should think about some type of Civil action against the company and the union! For knowingly forcing us to break a Federal Regulation!

I am with you on that one. Can you imagine the repercussions we would incur if we chose which FAR's we wanted to follow or enforce????????? It is time for the RSV's to rally together!!! I want my 24 hour break in base. I do not think that should be negotitated away!!!!!!!! :down:

 

[tahitigirl]

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!

It does raise the question about the 24 hour duty days. If being on call is the same as being on duty (per the FAA)than we shouldn't be on call for more than 14 hours a day. I wonder if anyone has mentioned this to the union or company?

 

[IMisstheAladdinTrays]

It does raise the question about the 24 hour duty days. If being on call is the same as being on duty (per the FAA)than we shouldn't be on call for more than 14 hours a day. I wonder if anyone has mentioned this to the union or company?

I'm sure they have!

 

[Snickerdoodles]

Perhaps we should think about some type of Civil action against the company and the union! For knowingly forcing us to break a Federal Regulation!

It is already in the works!!!!!
Attorney said they would be willing to take the case on a contingency basis.

 

[IMisstheAladdinTrays]

It is already in the works!!!!!
Attorney said they would be willing to take the case on a contingency basis.

Good! How would one get on the list?

 

[Snickerdoodles]

It does raise the question about the 24 hour duty days. If being on call is the same as being on duty (per the FAA)than we shouldn't be on call for more than 14 hours a day. I wonder if anyone has mentioned this to the union or company?

Yes, have already gotten information on how to go about getting this done!!!! And FYI this was not information provided by the union. S000... we have completed round one now it is time for round two. Reserves it is time to take a stand and be united not divided!

Good! How would one get on the list?

As soon as the details are ironed out will get that information out to everyone. As stated in the wizard of oz in time my pretty in time.

 

[IMisstheAladdinTrays]

Yes, have already gotten information on how to go about getting this done!!!! And FYI this was not information provided by the union. S000... we have completed round one now it is time for round two. Reserves it is time to take a stand and be united not divided!
As soon as the details are ironed out will get that information out to everyone. As stated in the wizard of oz in time my pretty in time.

Okay.

 

[Snickerdoodles]

Good! How would one get on the list?

Will get that info out once everything is in place.

 

[Fu-ManchuStew]

It does raise the question about the 24 hour duty days. If being on call is the same as being on duty (per the FAA)than we shouldn't be on call for more than 14 hours a day. I wonder if anyone has mentioned this to the union or company?

You are exactly right!! The Union seems to turn a deaf ear when it comes to RSV's issues, at least in my base where the rep's are senior B/H's. This is an issue known as FAR 121.471, or a 8 hours rest period within a 24 hour day on duty. I DOUBT the Union will assist us on this one if they knowingly allowed us to violate F.A.R 121.467 for several years. I guess someone will have to contact the FAA Legal Department again and find out what our rights and legalities truly are. (If I am not mistaken I thought that was what we pay our Union dues for?) It does seem pitiful that the Union is not our ally in this fight for protection, rest and quality of life. Instead they have turned this issue into an ETB nightmare for everyone.

 

[Fu-ManchuStew]

Speaking of our MEC President - I heard a disturbing rumor that he was running for International President against Pat "not our" Friend. That would be going from bad to worse!!!