Great that we are discussing some of these things. Let's keep it up.
Ringin, My apologies for using those words. No offence was intended.
Counter-rotation, good post and some good points raised. I don't agree with some of them and hope to get time to address them soon.
olderairhead, you said:
1. Grey Day.
By being available/contactable on a grey day is actually considered to be "on call" or "reserve". Currently you are not permitted to be on reserve prior to or after a rostered tour of duty. And if you were then it would count towards your rostered tour of duty.
If you had any understanding of what is in each document you would have understood this.
Nobody is suggesting anything about being on call immediately after a period of duty or standby. There must be a rest period between the period of duty or standby before you go back on call. The CASA legislation says this (I think), and the company says this. Here is the "new" definition of grey day (the part relevent to this discussion), copied from the proposed CA document:
3.29 GREY DAY ... means the period of time rostered after a duty or standby period and following a minimum rest period, a pilot must be contactable and may be requested to perform a duty ...
3. Designated days off
You really do need to do some research on thois one! Read the definitions and the related clauses in conjunction with each other. Under the new document a day off away from home base etc is not considered to be a designated day off. What does this mean? If you are away from home base on temp transfer, leave relief or rostered away then on any "day off" the roster can be changed without consultation nor agreement and you are not entitled to the penalty payment.
I have read, read and reread all the relevent clauses on this one and cannot see how you can have this interpretation. You will have to spell it out to me.
Schedule C 1.8.9 says "A pilot shall not be required to work on a designated day off, provided that the company may request a pilot to work and where the pilot so agrees, they shall receive 2.5 times the pilot's day rate of pay for each day so worked".
Nothing in that about which base you are at. So, what about the definition for "designated day off"? Here it is:
3.18 DESIGNATED DAY OFF means the period that a pilot shall be free of all duty in their home base or base to which they have been temporarily transferred or during leave relief, from 2200 hours preceeding until 0600 hours after such calendar day.
So how, from the above two definitions, can you arrive at your conclusion?
You also said something about the meal allowances, but I still can't really make any comment about those at this stage, other than that regardless of what the changes to those are, the amounts will vary by only a few dollars (at the absolute most).
Seaeagle109, thanks for the post. I am running a bit short of time now so will address some of your points now and hopefully, some more later.
Regarding signing documentation that may expose you to legal liability - just continue refusing to sign it! The company will have no more recourse against you under the new CA than they currently do - do you think the inclusion of the word "required" makes that much difference? If they can sack you under the new wording, then they could have sacked you under the old wording - there really is virtually no difference.
APMR, with regard to your discussion with the General Manager about the changes after the negoiations being slipups. Bulls*it!! MB is a smart guy, he doesn't make errors like that when it comes to contracts and conditions; I watched him at close range for several years and the changes are to the company's advantage. Were there any clerical error/s in favour of the pilots?
There is a contradiction in your assertion re MB. You are saying he is a "smart guy" but also that he tried to sneak the changes through. A smart guy would not have tried to do that. Even someone of lesser intelligence would not have been that stupid.
With 18 changes, some quite wordy, and 1 that sticks out like a sore thumb (the calibration contract premium), it would have been extremely unlikely that someone, sometime in the future would not have noticed the changes.
Have you considered the risk he would have been taking? Again, only someone very stupid would take that risk. The risk is that the changes be discovered at a time in the future after the agreement has got up. Such a discovery would probably mean the OWS would investigate, declare the agreement void and levy financial penalties against PAA.
There would follow bad press for Pearl and Paspaley and the whole thing would be back to square 1. With the amount of wasted time and money, MB would probably be shown the door. Do you seriously thing "a smart guy" would take such a risk?
As to your question:
Were there any clerical error/s in favour of the pilots?
Yes, I believe there were. In the little analysis I did of the changes, I identified 3 clear cut improvements for the pilots but could only find 1 change that was a clear disadvantage to the pilots. There were 2 "possibly detrimental" changes for the pilots. I suggest you read my previous post for a full and detailed run down on each of those changes.