Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Cargo > FedEx
Dear MEC & LEC - Please vote this TA DOWN >

Dear MEC & LEC - Please vote this TA DOWN

Notices

Dear MEC & LEC - Please vote this TA DOWN

Old 08-28-2015, 08:59 PM
  #171  
Gets Weekends Off
 
DLax85's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Gear Monkey
Posts: 3,189
Default

Originally Posted by CloudSailor View Post
Truly, no disrespect to our MEC and NC, I know they have done their best against Goliath, but man, I feel like after 4 years, we just got our a$$ handed to us. The next 25 years will see us working twice as hard to even be near where we are today. I know the full TA language will clarify a lot of issues. But, from just the bullet points, and as much blue ink on them as we have seen, I'm just not feeling it.

1- A-plan. No multiplier increase - will memorialize a retirement account, that 25 years from now will be laughable. I feel that without a multiplier improvement (not in years but in percentage) the rest of the TA would have to be STELLAR. It is appears it will not be, IMO.

2- B-plan. 2% over the life of the 6 year contract? Not even close to industry 'standard' (I get that we have 'above industry' the A-plan, but without it improving, the B-plan should have gone to 12% minimum at signing).

3- Retirement. Having guys fly themselves into the grave right before retirement is genius and kills 2 birds with one stone - if I read that correctly they will have to have full vacation, fly the whole year, past peak, give the year notice, and then only get 50% of what they should be getting 150% of for leaving all that money and time with family (even though while sick) on the table. Then, they will have worked their a$$ off, at the age when it is hardest on the body, and will collect less checks of our withering A-fund.

4- Insurance. The bullet points feel like there is a lot of room for us to get whacked hard by this one. Vague in the bullet points.

5- 6 week bid months. I see this as a huge concession. With my low seniority, I've still been able to pull off some great winter, and summer vacations due to the 5 week bid month max. With 6 weeks bids... forget it. They have in fact found a way to limit our vacation flexibility. The fact that this bullet point is not in blue, could be a mistake, or it could be that a lot of other bullet points not in blue are concessionary.

I don't get it. I thought we had leverage. I thought we work for one of the, if not THE, most profitable American airlines in the last two decades.

My REAL concern: if this is what we come up with during record profits, mergers, phenomenal cash position, huge retirements, pilot shortage on the horizon, what will we be handed to us when the we are not in this great position to negotiate? ...
Just hoping people read the above post twice!
DLax85 is offline  
Old 08-28-2015, 09:19 PM
  #172  
Nice lookin' tree, there!
 
frozenboxhauler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MD-11, old man
Posts: 2,193
Default

Originally Posted by CloudSailor View Post
Truly, no disrespect to our MEC and NC, I know they have done their best against Goliath, but man, I feel like after 4 years, we just got our a$$ handed to us. The next 25 years will see us working twice as hard to even be near where we are today. I know the full TA language will clarify a lot of issues. But, from just the bullet points, and as much blue ink on them as we have seen, I'm just not feeling it.

1- A-plan. No multiplier increase - will memorialize a retirement account, that 25 years from now will be laughable. I feel that without a multiplier improvement (not in years but in percentage) the rest of the TA would have to be STELLAR. This bullet point should have been in blue. It appears the remaining TA will not be anywhere near stellar, IMO.

2- B-plan. 2% over the life of the 6 year contract? Not even close to industry 'standard' (I get that we have 'above industry' the A-plan, but without it improving, the B-plan should have gone to 12% minimum at signing).

3- Retirement. Having guys fly themselves into the grave right before retirement is genius and kills 2 birds with one stone - if I read that correctly they will have to have full vacation, fly the whole year, past peak, give the year notice, and then only get 50% of what they should be getting 150% of for leaving all that money and time with family (even though while sick) on the table. Then, they will have worked their a$$ off, at the age when it is hardest on the body, and will collect less checks from our withering A-fund.

4- Insurance. The bullet points feel like there is a lot of room for us to get whacked hard by this one. Vague in the bullet points.

5- 6 week bid months. I see this as a huge concession. With my low seniority, I've still been able to pull off some great winter, and summer vacations due to the 5 week bid month max. With 6 weeks bids... forget it. They have in fact found a way to limit our vacation flexibility. The fact that this bullet point is not in blue, could be a mistake, or it could be that a lot of other bullet points not in blue are concessionary.

I don't get it. I thought we had leverage. I thought we work for one of the, if not THE, most profitable American airlines in the last two decades.

My REAL concern: if this is what we come up with during record profits, mergers, phenomenal cash position, huge retirements, pilot shortage on the horizon, what will we negotiate when the we are not in this great position? We work for an outstanding company, why is our TA not reflecting that?

BTW, I'm with you FDXLAG, in that for a quick 3 hour turn, I'd rather maximize time behind a door, even if it's a sleep room, compared to going back and forth to the hotel, and having to carry more tipping $5's. But, I'd rather still have the option. Any turn over 4 hours should get a hotel room, big concession there. Like someone mentioned, I can see our hubturns slowly becoming 2:27 in duration.
Cloud, we DO have leverage.

If what is presented to us is not up to our individual expectations a NO vote is the only option. If the TA is voted down, replacing the NC will have to be the first priority and we start again. I'm fine with that.

I'm sure that the Company doesn't want this either. Keep the faith.
Cheers,
fbh
frozenboxhauler is offline  
Old 08-28-2015, 09:54 PM
  #173  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 43
Default

I continue to hear changes that were made in this TA that the company requested, and the line pilots did not request or even know about....that's not the definition of "negotiation". For example, I've never heard of a single pilot on the seniority list that wanted a 6-week bid period. Why wouldn't the union at least run this by some line pilots via polling to see if anyone had a problem with it. Four years of talk, talk, talk and not one word about changing the way we bid schedules, vacation, conflicts, etc until now. These guys are making BC look like a genius and that could mean more LOOPHOLES for us to be exploited. We may get bent over and shown the 50 states.....
repoman is offline  
Old 08-28-2015, 10:17 PM
  #174  
Organizational Learning 
 
TonyC's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: Directly behind the combiner
Posts: 4,948
Default

Originally Posted by repoman View Post

I continue to hear changes that were made in this TA that the company requested, and the line pilots did not request or even know about....that's not the definition of "negotiation". For example, I've never heard of a single pilot on the seniority list that wanted a 6-week bid period.

In fact, we got rid of the 6-week bid period in the 2006 CBA. This is a RE-introduction of the concept.

It does interesting things to us in various ways, and none of them are good for us.


Scope.

Vacation.

Scheduling.

...


I would hope we didn't ask for it, but I noticed they did NOT print it in blue. Does the Negotiating Committee not see it as a concession, err, I mean an efficiency for The Company?




.
TonyC is offline  
Old 08-28-2015, 10:19 PM
  #175  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,173
Default

Originally Posted by frozenboxhauler View Post

I'm sure that the Company doesn't want this either. Keep the faith.
Cheers,
fbh
I'm guessing the company would love it if this TA gets rejected. Remember that they've been stalling for years. More delay is a win for them. if I was on their side of the table I'd be pressing hard to get us to reject this TA. And then I'd settle in for another couple years of "negotiations".
Rock is online now  
Old 08-28-2015, 11:26 PM
  #176  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Deuce130's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: 777 FO
Posts: 931
Default

Originally Posted by Rock View Post
I'm guessing the company would love it if this TA gets rejected. Remember that they've been stalling for years. More delay is a win for them. if I was on their side of the table I'd be pressing hard to get us to reject this TA. And then I'd settle in for another couple years of "negotiations".
So you want to ratify a sub-standard TA to so we can stick it to the company? What?
Deuce130 is offline  
Old 08-28-2015, 11:45 PM
  #177  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,173
Default

Originally Posted by Deuce130 View Post
So you want to ratify a sub-standard TA to so we can stick it to the company? What?
That question makes several assumptions that do not logically flow from my statement. I simply said I believe the company would love for us to reject this TA so negotiations can extend for another couple years.
Rock is online now  
Old 08-29-2015, 12:12 AM
  #178  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: Crewmember
Posts: 1,368
Default

I would love to see this TA rejected, too.

I don't think negotiations would drag on. I think the union should take a survey (or just read this board) and see what we don't like, and then the union and the company should fix it.

Remember how they told us the FDA LOA's were the "best they could do", and then the company suddenly could do "better"?

Do you tell the car salesman you will pay full price for the new car, or do you get up and walk out?

It is time for us, as a crew force, to get up and walk out. The more "no" votes, the better. You know how you always want a strike vote to be 98% in favor? Well, once we read the full contract, if it is really the turd it appears to be, we need to try to overwhelmingly vote it down, so it is clear to the company that they will have to do better.

Remember how the company spin doctors got an award for their "communications strategy" to break us during the 97-98 negotiations? I used to have a copy of it, but I have misplaced it. Perhaps someone knows what I am talking about and can post it. I am sure the company will be spinning all they can for this one as well. Beware. Read the contract. Ask the hard questions. If you don't get an iron clad satisfactory answer, it is time to send it back for a rework.
Nightflyer is offline  
Old 08-29-2015, 12:17 AM
  #179  
Line Holder
 
Kolohe's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: MD F/O
Posts: 45
Default

Originally Posted by MaxKts View Post
Question 1:

Which "industry" are we leading?

Question 2:

For how long?
"Industry leading" for a group of individuals that lack an appreciation for the fundamentals inherent to an actual professional airline pilot contract and basic standards of the profession. Futon crew rest facilities, ****ters in the cockpit, bidding aircraft without a pay scale, proud lanyards for a "new" airplane that is 20+ years old, no real-time trip trading, no visible audit log on trip trading assignments, inane accepted fares, calendar blockers who make special deals with scheduling, toleration of company schedulers who engage in special deals with select crews, Captains that reject jumpseaters, et al....are we truly surprised that this contract as recommended does not adequately reflect the pay, retirement, and comprehensive work rules associated with a highly-successful business entity that employs (what should be) a corps of professional airline pilots?

While there appear to be line item tactical improvements with this TA, the more strategic items are seemingly deficient. Any other viable professional pilot group paired with the desperate flight operation disposition that we currently have would reject this TA for the lagging pay and retirement alone. Follow Delta's lead--reject this TA and hold the appropriate reps accountable. The company will suffer more than we will in the cooling off period. Do you honestly believe the current manning can meet a 6-month requirement? Take a stand for the profession; refine the big ticket items to make this TA worthy of approval by a professional Federal Express pilot corps, not a substandard agreement for those satisfied with flying for Redneck Express.
Kolohe is offline  
Old 08-29-2015, 02:50 AM
  #180  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Default

Originally Posted by TonyC View Post
A few minutes ago it was just rumors; now you're willing to bet your ... posterior ... that it's industry leading.

Hmmm.
.
And you haven't been making assumptions? Based on the talking points you bet your A$$. They did a nice fix on 4A2B, they improved accepted fares. Better scheduling rules. You bet.
FDXLAG is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
newKnow
Delta
80
08-23-2015 11:10 PM
gzsg
Delta
10296
07-10-2015 01:42 PM
Superdad
Major
19
05-26-2012 06:24 PM
Pinchanickled
Regional
33
12-17-2010 06:58 PM
RockBottom
Major
0
01-07-2006 03:24 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices