Changes in the company's application of an FAA rule regarding advance drug testing notification methods have led to inconsistent and sometimes confusing or alarming procedures by local management. Last fall, we published information about the FAA's decision that ACARs was an unacceptable means to notify crewmembers inflight of a drug test to take place upon landing. What is missing, however, is an official communication from the company that details the new process, the reason for the change, and explaining how the procedure will be consistently applied from base to base.

Recently, we have received a higher-than-normal volume of reports about notification inconsistencies and problems. Generally, the notification messages are received from dispatch and conveyed by the pilots, but concerns remain about message content. Some members have received messages indicating company personnel would meet their flight, while assuring them it was not a family emergency. Unfortunately, others have not included that assurance, generating unnecessary alarm. Still others received no dispatch message at all, but were met by local personnel and advised of a test upon deplaning.

We are pushing the company for a standard script to be given to dispatch, always including the "non-emergency" piece. Additionally, logistics unique to each base necessitate a standard on-the-ground practice so flight attendants don't inadvertently miss an in-person notification. At some bases, for instance, personnel might not be at the aircraft door following an international flight. Designated testers might be stationed in one area attempting to locate their testee, while the Crewmember could depart Customs headed in a different direction, and never receive notification at all.

JUMPSEAT LISTING and NON-REV TRAVEL

Jumpseat listing confusion abounds following recently published jumpseat guidelines and changes to listing procedures in the cutover from PARS to TravelNet. Alert members, particularly those who commute, immediately recognized areas that challenge and/or outright violate our Contract. First, please take the time to familiarize yourself with Section 25, General regarding PMNW XFA contractual jumpseat specifications. Click HERE for a print-and-carry copy of our contractual jumpseat listing page, just in case you, a fellow flight attendant or a gate agent need it for reference.

As most of you are aware, our contract states that "A Flight Attendant may list as both a non-revenue passenger and XFA seat rider on the same flight." However, when listing for both on DeltaNet, members are discovering this creates a duplicate booking in the Delta computer system. This is a programming issue for Delta, as their reservations system processes the listings differently than PARS did.  Bottom line, the company did not adequately prepare for this contractual provision, but they have advised a "fix" is in the works.

Some members have expressed concern over potential discipline for inadvertently violating Delta's policy about duplicate booking. Know this: it is your contractual right to book both, and discipline should never enter the equation in this situation. If you are required to attend a manager meeting for booking jumpseat and listing as non-rev on the same flight, contact your Local Council for assistance.

     AND WHILE WE'RE ON THE JUMPSEAT...

Remember that flight attendants with a jumpseat reservation are not to be removed from or denied use of the jumpseat due to weight and balance issues. Flight Attendants received this "Clarification on XFA (jumpseat) travel on weight restricted flights" memo on 09.18.09. CSAs were advised of the same in a Policy Alignment memo issued in 9.19.09 and reminded in a 12.25.09 update stating "When a flight is deemed to be payload optimized, it will be necessary to accommodate all reserved (RS) PMDL & PMNW cockpit and cabin jumpseat requests onboard and these riders are not to be removed." Some commuters have suggesting printing a copy of the FA and CSA memos, which can be found on DeltaNet, to carry for reference.