Ramp Agents Only (PLEASE!)

[Ramp Rogue]

Would you please state whether you would prefer Date Of Hire Seniority or Classification Seniority? And your reasons for choosing one over the other. Thank You.

 

[carl71]

I would prefer Date of Hire, if nothing else to preserve the earned benefit that goes with going thru all the corporate mis-management and BS they have weathered.

 

[diogenes]

I would prefer something that accounts for hours of service.

Part-timers are scheduled about 20 hours a week, or about 1000 hours annually.

Full-timers are scheduled 40 hours a week, or 2000 annually.

Scenario A.

Assume I hired on in 1/1/2000 part-time, and upgraded to full-time 1/1/2005. Let's further assume it is now 1/1/2007. I would have worked a total of 9,000 hours.

Scenario B.

Now let's assume I hired on in 1/1/2000 part-time, upgraded to full-time in 1/1/2001, and it is now 1/1/2007. I now would have worked 13,000 hours - 69% more than in the first scenario.

Date of hire would give each scenario equal seniority.

Sorry, if you want to work part-time for many years, that is your business, but don't look for a windfall you didn't earn.

IMHO.

 

[Ramp Rogue]

I would prefer something that accounts for hours of service.

Part-timers are scheduled about 20 hours a week, or about 1000 hours annually.

Full-timers are scheduled 40 hours a week, or 2000 annually.

Scenario A.

Assume I hired on in 1/1/2000 part-time, and upgraded to full-time 1/1/2005. Let's further assume it is now 1/1/2007. I would have worked a total of 9,000 hours.

Scenario B.

Now let's assume I hired on in 1/1/2000 part-time, upgraded to full-time in 1/1/2001, and it is now 1/1/2007. I now would have worked 13,000 hours - 69% more than in the first scenario.

Date of hire would give each scenario equal seniority.

Sorry, if you want to work part-time for many years, that is your business, but don't look for a windfall you didn't earn.

IMHO.

Where in the seniority line would the part-timers fall that work more hours weekly, than some full-timers? There are part-timers that do 8 hour doubles everyday. Should they automatically be ahead of full-timers?

How do you place in the seniority line the part-timers that work 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, or 6.5 hours a day, depending what city they are in? It's not there fault that some cities just don't have a lot of flights in and out.

There must be an equal balance. DOH gives that balance.

 

[diogenes]

Part-time agents are not scheduled for extended hours, they voluntarily pick them up.

If the company regularly scheduled you 40 hours or more per week, you'd be de facto full-time, and even the IAM could win a grieveance having you recognized as such.

As for your 2.5 - 6.5 range, there are simple solutions, one being take the annual hours scheduled and divide it by the total days scheduled.

For instance, if part-time total hours scheduled for a year are 1200, and the total days scheduled are 250, 1200/250 = 4.8 average hours daily.

Or to make it simpler, make it a 1:2 ratio like PI did. Part-time PI agents got 1/2 of their p/t time credited towards f/t classification seniority.

Lastly, there are p/t agents who trade out of their schedule, and may work very little to none for weeks.

They should accrue seniority at the same rate as someone putting in 40 hours a week?

 

[wings396]

I will have to agree with the above post. I always felt that the amount of scheduled hours worked should be a deciding factor. Years ago, I worked with a few people who were P/T by choice for over 10 years, then took a F/T position. A few of them started with the company a few weeks prior to me, but over that 10 year period I worked twice as many scheduled hours as they did. With the system that we had in place, they were behind me in bidding classification. I never had any major issues with not going by DOH, and neither did any of my former coworkers.

 

[Ramp Rogue]

I will have to agree with the above post. I always felt that the amount of scheduled hours worked should be a deciding factor. Years ago, I worked with a few people who were P/T by choice for over 10 years, then took a F/T position. A few of them started with the company a few weeks prior to me, but over that 10 year period I worked twice as many scheduled hours as they did. With the system that we had in place, they were behind me in bidding classification. I never had any major issues with not going by DOH, and neither did any of my former coworkers.

Where do you stand now with US going by DOH-Classification-DOH, and HP going by straight DOH?

 

[D M G]

Classification....not DOH.

My response to your thread 13 months ago on this subject, copied/pasted:

Here's the logic behind it:

FSA #1 was hired part time on 6-1-1981. He has a full time job as a school teacher, and took the job with the company for the flight benefits which he can use while on break from teaching.

FSA #2 was hired part time on 6-2-1981, and holds no other job. He took the job hoping it leads to full time, at which time he'll earn a decent living.

On 6-30-1981 the company is upgrading FSA to full time, at which time FSA #1 turns it down and FSA #2 takes the upgrade.

Over the next 10 years FSA #1 works 20 hours per week, repeatedly turns down full time, is able to hold weekends off after one year, holds daywork during the summer months (could hold it permanent if it wasn't for teaching), and get prime weeks for vacation.

During the same time frame FSA #2 works 40 hours per week, is able to get part of a weekend off after 10 years, can't touch daywork, and is forced to take his three weeks of vacation between January and March or October thru the second week of November.

The city these agents work in expands and FSA #1 sees that he can hold daywork, full time. He's now at the top of the payscale and realizes that he'd be better off quiting his teaching job and going full time at the airline, so he does.

Bid time is here and there is only 1 full time daywork line left. Who deserves it more? Who should get it? FSA #1 or FSA #2.

No question in my mind it should be FSA #2. FSA #1 deserves to have his service time cut in half, therefore we have classification date.

 

[Ramp Rogue]

Classification....not DOH.

My response to your thread 13 months ago on this subject, copied/pasted:

Here's the logic behind it:

FSA #1 was hired part time on 6-1-1981. He has a full time job as a school teacher, and took the job with the company for the flight benefits which he can use while on break from teaching.

FSA #2 was hired part time on 6-2-1981, and holds no other job. He took the job hoping it leads to full time, at which time he'll earn a decent living.

On 6-30-1981 the company is upgrading FSA to full time, at which time FSA #1 turns it down and FSA #2 takes the upgrade.

Over the next 10 years FSA #1 works 20 hours per week, repeatedly turns down full time, is able to hold weekends off after one year, holds daywork during the summer months (could hold it permanent if it wasn't for teaching), and get prime weeks for vacation.

During the same time frame FSA #2 works 40 hours per week, is able to get part of a weekend off after 10 years, can't touch daywork, and is forced to take his three weeks of vacation between January and March or October thru the second week of November.

The city these agents work in expands and FSA #1 sees that he can hold daywork, full time. He's now at the top of the payscale and realizes that he'd be better off quiting his teaching job and going full time at the airline, so he does.

Bid time is here and there is only 1 full time daywork line left. Who deserves it more? Who should get it? FSA #1 or FSA #2.

No question in my mind it should be FSA #2. FSA #1 deserves to have his service time cut in half, therefore we have classification date.

Then why is it that if you were hired before 1980 you go by hire date? If you were hired between 1980 and 1996 you go by classification date? And if you were hired after 1996 you once again go by hire date, whether you are parttime or fulltime? And HP goes by hire date no matter when they were hired, or if they are fulltime or parttime? There has to be some equal way to balance the workforce. classification doesn't do it. Hire Dtae puts evryone on an even playing field. You get in where you fit in.

 

[wings396]

I was hired in 1979, and always went by classification date. I was former PI, and I know that US did a bit of adjusting after the merger. They also did something different with the way dates were adjusted later on, but I never paid any attention to it, as it didn't affect me. I recall that people who took a temporary upgrade to F/T got credit for that time as well. Unfortunatly I don't stand anywhere but in the cold on this any longer, as I am on furlough. :unsure:
At this point, I would just be happy to be recalled at the rate of pay that I left with. Once you have been out of work for a while, you realize that going back and forth with some of these issues is senseless. At my current place of employment, I am 2nd from the bottom of the crap heap, and will be there for a long time by the way it looks.... 🙁

 

[700UW]

I am not a ramp agent but I would like to know your thoughts on the P/Timers that were forced to P/T from F/T?

 

[wings396]

I am not a ramp agent but I would like to know your thoughts on the P/Timers that were forced to P/T from F/T?

As far as I know, they did't lose any classification senoirity if they were involuntarily bumped down. I could be wrong, but recall a few that I worked with who were downgraded discussing this topic.

 

[libertybell]

I am not a ramp agent but I would like to know your thoughts on the P/Timers that were forced to P/T from F/T?

The Topic stated Replying to Ramp Agents Only (Please!)

I think that was a polite way of saying keeping out of this thread 700 so butt out and leave this one for the rampers you can always inject your 2 cents on someother thread.

 

[700UW]

Last time I checked anyone can post on this message board, it is not a "ramp" exclusive.

So if you don't like it use the ignore feature.

 

[Kev3188]

For what it's worth, here's how it works over at NW:

We have three different classifications on the ramp (PT, FT and Lead). DOH is used for payrates, (now frozen) pension service credit, and non revenue travel. It *can* also be used for vacation bidding, depending on a particular stations vacation bidding procedure (otherwise it goes by classification).

Classification seniority is used for bidding work schedules, bidding transfers to other stations, or exercising seniority if displaced. For example, if a FT agent in city A wants to bid a FT spot in city B, he would use his FT seniority, and not DOH. Or in my case, when bidding a work schedule I use my Lead time, not my FT or DOH time.

Hope this makes sense, and contributes...