 Section 2: Management Rights
|
| GTN: 433-08 |
Issue: 2.4 Discipline |
Deadlocked |
|
| GTN: 122-09 |
Issue: 2.4 Discipline |
Deadlocked |
|
| GTN: 130-09 |
Issue: 2.4 Discipline |
Deadlocked |
Section 5: Seniority
|
|
GTN: 425-08
|
Issue: 5.5(D) Limitations on Management Pilot Line Flying
The grievant claimed a violation of Section 5.5 of the CBA which states, “[F]lying by management pilots will not result in the furlough or demotion of a line crewmember.” Based upon the evidence presented to the board, there is no violation of the Agreement. The Board notes that flying of Management pilots in this case did not result in the demotion of any crewmember. |
Denied |
| |
|
|
| GTN: 102-09 |
Issue: Section 5 & 6.8(B)(1)
This grievance concerns crewmember qualifications associated with an SDP bid award. Based on the evidence presented to the board, there is no violation of the Agreement and the grievance denial is upheld. Members of the Board have noted continuous improvement in the SDP evaluation process over the years; the Board believes improvement opportunities still exist for the UTC and the Company Training and Standards Department to collaborate to improve the existing SDP evaluation process. The Board continues to recommend the parties meet and discuss ways to improve the overall understanding of the evaluation process, including future changes to the process. |
Denied |
Section 8: Vacations
|
| GTN: 423-08 |
This grievance asks the question of whether or not a crewmember accrues vacation while on a leave of absence. The Board determined that crewmembers do not earn vacation while on leave of absences. Based on presentations before the Board, the grievant accrued the appropriate amount of vacation prior to his LOA. Further, the Company properly allowed previously awarded vacation to be rescheduled upon the crewmember’s return to work. |
Denied |
|
| GTN: 120-09 |
This grievance cites CBA Sections 8 and 16.
This grievance asks the question of whether or not a crewmember accrues vacation while on a military leave of absence. The Board determined that crewmembers do not earn vacation while on leave of absences. Based on presentations before the Board, the grievant accrued the appropriate amount of vacation prior to his LOA. Further, the Company properly allowed previously awarded vacation to be rescheduled upon the crewmember’s return to work. |
Denied |
|
| GTN: 128-09 |
This grievance asks the question of whether or not a crewmember accrues vacation while on a military leave of absence. The Board determined that crewmembers do not earn vacation while on leave of absences. Based on presentations before the Board, the grievant accrued the appropriate amount of vacation prior to his LOA. The Company rescheduled vacation upon the crewmember’s return to work. In this case, the parties have agreed to consider allowing the crewmember to reschedule the remaining vacations within the vacation year. |
Denied |
Section 13: Crew Bases
|
|
GTN: 125-09
|
Issue: 13.8(A) Release from dty at location other than base on a crewmember’s last day
This grievance requested the Board to define, “expectation of further duty” as used within Section 13.8(A) of the CBA. |
Deadlocked |
Section 19: Scheduling
|
GTN: 416-08 |
This grievance concerns an equitable distribution of flying violation. Records reviewed by the parties indicate an equitable distribution of flying was applied consistent with the Agreement. Therefore, the parties have agreed to withdraw the grievance.
This grievance appeal was resolved at the pre-SBA True-Up Session. |
Withdrawn |
|
| GTN: 436-08 |
This grievance concerned the violation of two 8-day tours within the same bid period. The parties agreed to settle the grievance for three (3) extended days on a non-precedent setting basis.
This grievance appeal was resolved at the pre-SBA True-Up Session. |
Settled |
|
GTN: 104-09 |
This grievance involved a multiple day aftermidnight event with unique circumstances. The parties agreed to settle the grievance for three (3) extended days and one (1) normal daily rate pay at the rate in effect at the time of occurrence on a non-precedent setting basis.
This grievance appeal was resolved at the pre-SBA True-Up Session. |
Settled |
|
| GTN: 105-09 |
This grievance involved a multiple day aftermidnight event with unique circumstances. The parties agreed to settle the grievance for three (3) extended days and one (1) normal daily rate pay at the rate in effect at the time of occurrence on a non-precedent setting basis.
This grievance appeal was resolved at the pre-SBA True-Up Session. |
Settled |
Section 20: Expenses & Meals
|
| GTN: 427-08 |
Issue: 20.7(C)
This grievance concerns the interpretation of the Section 20.7(C) requirement to order food by the end of duty on the previous day and if this precludes the crewmember from filing a crew meal deviation report.
The parties agreed to settle the grievance for reimbursement of one (1) meal equivalent to $13 on a non-precedent setting basis.
This grievance appeal was resolved at the pre-SBA True-Up Session. |
Settled |
|
| GTN: 101-09 |
Issue: 20.3
This grievance concerns the GE Credit Card expiration of loyalty points within three years. |
Deadlocked |
| |
|
|
| GTN: 118-09 |
Issue: 20.7(D)(1)
This grievance concerned crew food reimbursement for two missed meals. The parties agreed to settle the grievance for reimbursement of two (2) meals equivalent to the maximum compensation entitled by subsection 20.7(D)(1) of the Agreement, which is $40.
This grievance appeal was resolved at the pre-SBA True-Up Session. |
Settled |
|
| GTN: 131-09 |
Issue: 20.3
This grievance concerns the reduction of accident travel insurance from $1,000,000 on the previous Company credit card to $300,000 on the current AMEX credit card. |
Deadlocked |
Section 28: Hours of Service
|
GTN: 434-08
|
Issue: 28.3(F)(1) Standby Duty: Start and End Times
This grievance concerned the lack of notice provided to the grievant to determine when Standby duty ended and another type of duty began. The aircraft assigned to the grievant had a maintenance event and the grievant began Standby Duty. However, the aircraft was released from maintenance and became airworthy within three hours of the time Standby Duty began. The crewmembers were never notified of any maintenance release or a change in their duty. |
Deadlocked |
|
| GTN: 438-08 |
The grievant called in sick the next to last day on his tour. The Company elected to brief the grievant for a show at his residence on his last day and the grievant accepted/acknowledged the brief. Section 10.4(A)(6) states, “An on-duty crewmember who requests sick leave on the next-to-last day of a tour will be charged one (1) full PTO day for the last day of his tour even if the crewmember calls in well.” The Company did not apply this section correctly because it continues to state that if the Company and crewmember agree to perform duty on the last day after calling in well, the crewmember will not be charged a sick day.
The parties agreed to settle the grievance for return of pay deducted for the date Dec. 12, 2008.
This grievance appeal was resolved at the pre-SBA True-Up Session. |
Settled |
|
GTN: 107-09 |
Issue: 28.5(A)(1)(a)
This grievance concerns a “local in nature” hotel accommodation. The grievant claimed the hotel was not “local in nature” and the Company should have known that the hotel was not “local in nature”. However, based on the evidence presented by neutral parties, the travel is “local in nature” as defined in the Agreement. The Board finds no violation of the Agreement.
|
Denied |
| *GTN: Grievance Tracking Number |
