ETB-UNION "OFFICE WORK" AND FAR 121.466/467

[Zarah]

I fail to see the connection between getting to work by any means regardless if it is a plane, train, bus, car, or walking and the issue at hand.

 

[Lovethesun]

The FAR does not address volunteer work. Should we flag the crewmember who, to comply with company directives on "communting", voluntarily shows up at 1230 for a 2015 departure? Believe me, you will only lose on this. Every commuter will hate you personally for highlighting such rules. In a base where over 90% of the crewmembers commute, you will find your name on all the bathroom walls.
Much less, the company does not wish to address "volunteer work" as they would lose, among other things, the ability to assign pilots in the chief pilots office as "reserves of last resort".
Go ahead, make a stink and see your tutu get handed to yourself, Danny boy.



Sharktooth...do believe that you are definitely reaching for a defense that is stretching a bit. You are missing the complete point to this. And needless to say the company cannot as you put it use the chief pilots as reserves by the definition of this FAR!!!! So try again and this time get it right.

 

[Travelpro72]

I'd sure like to know what commuting to work has to do with being a volunteer? When I commute I'm not working nor am I getting PAID. I don't understand? :blink:

 

[Lovethesun]

I'd sure like to know what commuting to work has to do with being a volunteer? When I commute I'm not working nor am I getting PAID. I don't understand? :blink:

As I said Sharktooth is definitely reaching. This has nothing to do with commuting and it is just a way to get the focus off of the real issue. Do believe that Sharktooth has had one too many cocktails tonight. B)

 

[airportman]

Fourth - The Original Poster IMO should have kept this to themselves and went right to the FAA or appropriate agency with the FAR and whatever supporting documentation was available and dropped the hammer. If the offenders were smart enough to figure this scam out they are probably smart enough to cover their tracks, which I would wager they are doing as we speak.


You are correct i could have gone to the FAA myself but with the company reading this Message Board i dont have to do it......When the read this they will report it, and then they dont risk the fines and citations for it thus thats why Self Reporting works.......They will address it or i will report it.......The local 70 cant cover there traxx too well cat crew and the laser printer for the past several months come in handy nothing like a paper trail that cant be changed one good thing about catcrew it date/time stamps the screens.

SO I GUESS TICK TOCK TICK TOCK TIME IS RUNNING OUT......

AND THE GREEDY GET NAILED AGAIN

 

[Bluewater]

Paid Union officials/officers flying the etb after a day in the office should read far 121.466 and 121.467 because they are in danger of a violation and the company "SELF-REPORTING" the issue as it is a violation.
Highlight:

8 hours of office duty before commencing the pre-flight duties for a flight assignment, results in a much more fatigued flight attendant, and presents a greater danger to the safety of the flying public than both the time a flight attendant spends waiting after an early report and the time a flight attendant spends in the break between flight assignments in a hotel room that the drafters said would be included in “duty period.â€￾ We conclude that it is reasonable to interpret the regulation to include airport ground duties in “duty periodâ€￾ when a flight attendant is assigned a mix of airport ground duties, such as office duty.

Complete FAR'S can be viewed on the faa website.
Gee now it seems with a little research its not only unethical but not legal......

Wonder how much the fine is and if they will take the certificate from the f/a's that do it?
Only time will tell

 

[Bluewater]

I have to add my two cents
I'm new to this...after going back in history to read some of the posting....I must say...The Lady (?) 'doth protest too much'! :blink: Lets see.....Shark tooth...Ms. L our illustrious union leader?!!!
Shark tooth doesn't have much command of the English language, as she is reduced over and over again to name calling when the debate heats up. She is making known her hostility. 😉 Perhaps guilt is the driving force here? Usually a person who feels inadequate tries to intimidate, and demean in order to feel more important. She 'attacks' when she is disagreed with. A very narrow mindset 😛h34r:
Bottom line is this. We have fellow f/a's who are just trying to make ends meet. Single Mom's and Dad's...all just trying to eke out a living. THEN we have those who just have to have a bigger piece of the pie. I am very disheartened to hear that Ms. L is trying to defend her shaky position. ( and worst yet...Mr. Flores shame on you...EVERYTHING the union reps do IS OUR BUSINESS WHEN IT AFFECTS US...Your response to our inquiry was reprehensible and certianly not leadership) :down:
A REAL union leader would have stepped up to the plate. She might have stated that she hadn't "realized"" how her actions would be interpreted. Or, when hearing the LOUD roar over this issue, she might have made the statement that 'in order for those who are in need of the extra income, I can't in good conscious continue reaping the extra income...I will give someone else the opportunity to have a little more at the end of the month.' (ever think of that Ms. Long in the Shark Tooth?) Well don't hold your breath folks...after seeing some of her e mails and her blogs....her tired old diatribes sound much more like that of a whiny 16 year old. She is an embarrassment. Now let us pause a moment...what clever repartee will she invoke 😀

 

[700UW]

DELETED BY MODERATOR


DON'T MAKE ANY REFERENCE TO A PERSON'S IDENTITY.

 

[Breath_of_Fresh_USAirways]

This is what I'm hearing:

The elected union reps are busily VOLENTEERING their time (since when is AFA a charity?) to aid their brethren -- but are actually getting paid because no one in their right mind would ever really, truly VOLUNTEER to serve in those positions?

So, then, these supposedly hard-working, exhausted FA's are then doing European flying? I don't know, but even when I have a slow day at work and leave early to catch a flight to Europe -- I AM TIRED! The last thing I need is for a flight attendant that has been working hard VOLUNTEERING for his/her brethren (that are so needy and cause so much stress for us 'cause we're working so hard for them, etc...) to be responsible for MY SAFETY on a trans-Atlantic flight! They obviously are not fresh or their most alert -- and even if they don't "work" in the office that day, let's face it, doing both is like having 2 jobs. No one can be highly effective at both jobs if they're working this hard.

If these elected union officials are truly the "professionals" they want us to believe they are, then they need to pick one or the other -- get paid to represent the union or get paid to fly. Neither is a part-time job and either one deserves their full attentions.

Oh, wait, if this so-called VOLUNTEERING at the AFA union office is charitable work, they're probably taking their mileage/meals and other expenses off of their income taxes, too!

Also, how can an elected union rep that works so hard in the office for his/her brethren represent those same brethren when the company starts asking for more hours and less time-off, etc, etc, etc -- if these elected officials can juggle 2 jobs (VOLUNTEERING in the office AND flying trips) and put in all these hours, why can't everyone else do it to? Yeah, just the people I've always wanted to represent me, NOT!

 

[Career Reserve]

This is what I'm hearing:

The elected union reps are busily VOLENTEERING their time (since when is AFA a charity?) to aid their brethren -- but are actually getting paid because no one in their right mind would ever really, truly VOLUNTEER to serve in those positions?

So, then, these supposedly hard-working, exhausted FA's are then doing European flying? I don't know, but even when I have a slow day at work and leave early to catch a flight to Europe -- I AM TIRED! The last thing I need is for a flight attendant that has been working hard VOLUNTEERING for his/her brethren (that are so needy and cause so much stress for us 'cause we're working so hard for them, etc...) to be responsible for MY SAFETY on a trans-Atlantic flight! They obviously are not fresh or their most alert -- and even if they don't "work" in the office that day, let's face it, doing both is like having 2 jobs. No one can be highly effective at both jobs if they're working this hard.

If these elected union officials are truly the "professionals" they want us to believe they are, then they need to pick one or the other -- get paid to represent the union or get paid to fly. Neither is a part-time job and either one deserves their full attentions.

Oh, wait, if this so-called VOLUNTEERING at the AFA union office is charitable work, they're probably taking their mileage/meals and other expenses off of their income taxes, too!

Also, how can an elected union rep that works so hard in the office for his/her brethren represent those same brethren when the company starts asking for more hours and less time-off, etc, etc, etc -- if these elected officials can juggle 2 jobs (VOLUNTEERING in the office AND flying trips) and put in all these hours, why can't everyone else do it to? Yeah, just the people I've always wanted to represent me, NOT!

I'm exhausted just reading this!

 

[Travelpro72]

Not hearing much support here on Local 70's defense. There was MUCH before.... Anyone? :unsure:

 

[aredeeyou22]

It's very tough to defend the indefensable.

Been away for awhile, not checking in here..... As I have stated previously, if someone can prove that there is all this "wrongdoing" within AFA70, great! Get the ball rolling! I am assuming that AFA National is going to come out with some sort of statement regarding these "infractions?" If not, then it will remain status quo, and that's that.

It seems to me that, if indeed they were flying ETB trips on the days they were in the office, there is a violation. So what are the ramifications? Who will enforce the punishment? Will they be recalled from office, or should we just "vote them out next time" as Pitbull states? Seems to me everyone is worked up about it on this site only, and nowhere else. Time will tell.

Also, is PHL the only council with this supposed ETB abuse? CLT? PIT? DCA? No one else? Hmmmm.... :blink:

 

[airportman]

Been away for awhile, not checking in here..... As I have stated previously, if someone can prove that there is all this "wrongdoing" within AFA70, great! Get the ball rolling! I am assuming that AFA National is going to come out with some sort of statement regarding these "infractions?" If not, then it will remain status quo, and that's that.

It seems to me that, if indeed they were flying ETB trips on the days they were in the office, there is a violation. So what are the ramifications? Who will enforce the punishment? Will they be recalled from office, or should we just "vote them out next time" as Pitbull states? Seems to me everyone is worked up about it on this site only, and nowhere else. Time will tell.

Also, is PHL the only council with this supposed ETB abuse? CLT? PIT? DCA? No one else? Hmmmm.... :blink:

Keep watching.....results will come.

 

[proudf/a]

Been away for awhile, not checking in here..... As I have stated previously, if someone can prove that there is all this "wrongdoing" within AFA70, great! Get the ball rolling! I am assuming that AFA National is going to come out with some sort of statement regarding these "infractions?" If not, then it will remain status quo, and that's that.

It seems to me that, if indeed they were flying ETB trips on the days they were in the office, there is a violation. So what are the ramifications? Who will enforce the punishment? Will they be recalled from office, or should we just "vote them out next time" as Pitbull states? Seems to me everyone is worked up about it on this site only, and nowhere else. Time will tell.

Also, is PHL the only council with this supposed ETB abuse? CLT? PIT? DCA? No one else? Hmmmm.... :blink:

PIT's LECP has too much integrity to collect FPL and pick up ETB time. Besides that with reserves fighting for ETB time, the membership would never sit for that.

 

[aredeeyou22]

It now appears that there IS a "Smoking Gun". I'm certainly not familiar with FAR's and all of that. Prior to this FAR meant when I was in 3C it took the F/A longer to get there with my Gin & Tonic. 😀

The thing that I see here is not so much "Wrongdoing" as it is the appearance of same. This is often IMO worse than actually doing something bad. Take a look at recent history. People only really stared to freak out over the whole Bill/Monica thing when it became clear that he lied to cover it up.

That's why some here have their knickers in a twist. In an organization like a union you have to appear to be pristine ethically and that's not the case at Local 70.

How many ETB trips are these people flying each month? Aren't they responsible for being in the office a certain amount of days/ hours per month? As long as they meet those requirements, can they use ETB? I think Pitbull said it equates to about 21 days a month in office? Well, that leaves 9 or 10 days free to fly ETB, correct? Am I missing something here? Why should they not have access to the ETB on those days off? I just don't understand that....


Thank you for any clarification....