Where were they...

When we were bidding for our vacation days off, and the company only offered 10 hours per day?  Where were they when CAS had the bidding start at 0200 hours, with no advanced bidding and without being based on seniority?  Where were they when they should have been there, objecting to those conditions on our behalf?  How could they just stand idly by and allow CAS to only permit one person per day to have a day off?

Now, our do-nothing-but-take-our-dues union has the gall to schedule meetings with the workforce to update us on shop steward training, labor/management meeting outcomes, and their new CBA negotiations plan.

Did the filing of a motion to start the proceedings to have them removed as our union have anything to do with this?  You betcha!

Well, SEIU, it is too late! Nothing that you could say at these meetings will stop what has to be done.  SEIU, your time has come.

The "Plank" Owners' Reward!

On October 27th of this year, CAS will be reaching a 10 year milestone
at SFO.  Those employees who have been here since 2002 are considered
to be senior employees and, as such, "Plank" owners. Under the terms
of the original Collective Bargaining Agreement -- which CAS never
thought they would reach -- once the Plank owners reached 10 years of
service, there would be an automatic increase in the PTO rate of
accrual.

Incumbent employees are already receiving the higher rate of accrued
PTO, which, from the information that they have provided to us, is
9.65 hours of PTO every pay period.  This translates into 250.9 hours
of PTO/sick time per year.

In a recent proposal made by the company, CAS wanted to change the
maximum allowance to 21 days of PTO plus 4 days of sick time per year,
for a grand total of 200 hours.

Somehow, CAS feels that the Plank owners should give back 50 hours of
the PTO that they have been waiting 10 years to receive.

Isn't it wonderful to be so appreciated?  Let us not forget: " it's
profit before product", and CAS is only in this for the money.

Once again CAS is targeting Plank owners.  Is there anyone out there
that cannot see this?  In the recent past we have seen multiple
Plank-owner firings, which CAS alleges were justified.

What say you?

Are "Plank" owners being targeted?

There is a growing suspicion that, because of the increased rate of accrual of vacation time, CAS is looking for reasons to terminate those that are close to reaching 10 years of service.

The recent firings of two checkpoint supervisors who, by the way, were Plank owners, does give one food for thought. Is there any substance to this point?

You make the call, we are only passing on something that we are hearing more and more.

How about a shift bid that gives....

more than a few slots with weekends off? What is this "one slot" per line business? Why not have bidding slots based on seniority? Newbies get weekdays off; senior members of the workforce get weekends off.

When will this company ever recognize, and appreciate, the contributions of the members of the workforce that have been here since the beginning? ( or, within 2 or 3 years from day one.)

Maybe it is too much to ask! Maybe this is beyond your capabilities?

Members of the workforce, what do you think? Shouldn't management show some sort of gratitude? We would like to hear from you. Tell us what you think. Your names will not be released.

To Be or Not to Be?

Well, that is the pressing question for DFOs right now. Herr Filbert sent out a memo stating that they will be inquiring as to whether or not DFOs would like to go back to single function. Apparently they're looking for a certain number to go one way or the other. But the more pressing question is why the change of heart?

For years it was all you ever heard from Jeff Pugh, our dear leader from the former regime: Dual Function this, dual function that. I swear the guy had dreamt sweet nothings whenever the topic of dual function came about. In fact, Pugh stated that as long as he was working at CAS, there would never be another CTX person hired.

Well, as we know by now, about a year and half after Pugh's forced departure, Filbert has a different opinion. I always theorized that the reason Pugh got such an erection about dual functions was because CAS somehow got TSA to pay more for dual functions. When you look at coverage and bodies, it never made any sense to have that many dual functions. So if that theory was correct, why would they have a change of heart all of a sudden? That's anyone's guess. I have my theories, but we can save that for another time.

So now that they're going to finally follow the SOP and require all baggage certified persons to be OSARP trained there is something that our 9000 Specialists need to be concerned about, and that is being out of a job. Well, they won't terminate you, but the need for your specialized position must certainly be in play.

Once they accomplish the training of all baggage certified persons, there will be approximately 200+ that will be OSARP certified. That is in addition to the 50 or so 9000 specialists SFO currently has. If I were a 9000 specialist, I would be looking for another job (hey, shouldn't we all be doing that anyway?) or see if you can somehow manage with an $8 an hour pay cut. And don't look for the union to protect you either. CAS is well within their rights to eliminate a classification. Also, don't forget that this is the last year of our current CBA and negotiations for the next contract will be starting again sometime this year.

Back to the original question of this post. If you're a DFO and considering going single function you do have to weigh some things. Keep in mind that most of the CTX TSOs are plank owners. So unless you're a plank owner yourself, you will be near the bottom of the seniority of the CTX classification. If you opt to go checkpoint, your seniority will certainly increase over time due to the inevitable attrition at checkpoint. Then again, would you really want to stay checkpoint every day where you're treated like children or stay in the bag room where you're treated as an adult? There is a reason why the churn over rate is so much higher at checkpoint than it is in the bag room.

I can't answer the question for you. In all honesty, you're probably better off not going single function for the time being and see how all of this plays out. If CAS gets to a point where they force you to choose, then you will have to weigh your options.

It's too bad that CAS is putting the DFOs through the same chaos that they put the CTX community in for the last couple of years. Keep your chin up, they're liable to change their minds again in another couple of years.

Another Failed Experiment

We've been reporting on the DFO situation for sometime now. The latest news is that DFOs are being offered the chance to go CTX, Checkpoint, or to remain as a DFO. We can't imagine too many DFOs wanting to go up against the CTX seniority, then again, working at the checkpoint is no picnic either.

So the question is this: Is Donnie Filbert eliminating DFOs because of some TSA requirement or is this just his way to separate himself from his predecessor? Since Jeff Pugh got such a hardon whenever DFOs were mentioned, this might be the reason. Or it could simply be because TSA has determined we have too many DFOs. Either way, it is a huge turn of events.

For the longest time, DFOs were the only way to go. Those that had any sense of staffing knew that it really didn't make any sense to have such a large number of DFOs. Covenant Aviation Security's argument has always been that you get more flexibility with DFOs than you do with single function Officers. This argument doesn't stand up to scrutiny when you look at head counts and where help is needed.

For those of you that are a DFO, do you plan on switching or remaining, and why?