Thinking about Cargo? - A Contract Comparison
#41
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,018
Grundt, gumpscheck, johnny knoxville, and Industry Strd have all posted in this thread with the implication that they are authors of the site under discussion. Different identities of the same person; they all seem to attack other posters in the same manner, use similar language, and reference new material put up or defend the source.
It is full of holes, incidentally, and OAI isn't a cargo company. Not all cargo operators are listed.
Which "author" will attack this time?
It is full of holes, incidentally, and OAI isn't a cargo company. Not all cargo operators are listed.
Which "author" will attack this time?
#43
On Reserve
Joined APC: Mar 2018
Posts: 10
Errors
Seems to me, if you can declare an error, you know where it is located in the contract and should be willing to put that information in your post.
IE, FedEX 4.F.2.a Trip rig should be 1:3.75 (yes, that's correct in the comparison they provided)
The OP put up a product, added source material (proof/evidence) and asked for clarification if something is wrong. If you declare something wrong, you should post your proof/evidence. Then it can be verified (either by them or by other people following the thread).
Not sure if the OP is getting revenue, or just did this to help other pilots out. If it is the latter, seems like people on here that are interested in helping out would be more than happy to provide details of the error. If the former is true, it seems like people would still be happy to point out the specific error.
The post stating that per diem was transposed between FedEX and UPS is a pretty good example. In the document I just downloaded, the per diem for FedEX was correct (from FedEX 5.A.1).
Seems like the author wants to fix things that are identified and can be reasonably verified.
If I had personally put all this together, I would ignore claimed errors that weren't provided with a section. I believe it is justified, because I know that I interpreted the data that I presented. Of course, the transposition error, I would go back and check because it is specific enough as well as being a data entry error...
IE, FedEX 4.F.2.a Trip rig should be 1:3.75 (yes, that's correct in the comparison they provided)
The OP put up a product, added source material (proof/evidence) and asked for clarification if something is wrong. If you declare something wrong, you should post your proof/evidence. Then it can be verified (either by them or by other people following the thread).
Not sure if the OP is getting revenue, or just did this to help other pilots out. If it is the latter, seems like people on here that are interested in helping out would be more than happy to provide details of the error. If the former is true, it seems like people would still be happy to point out the specific error.
The post stating that per diem was transposed between FedEX and UPS is a pretty good example. In the document I just downloaded, the per diem for FedEX was correct (from FedEX 5.A.1).
Seems like the author wants to fix things that are identified and can be reasonably verified.
If I had personally put all this together, I would ignore claimed errors that weren't provided with a section. I believe it is justified, because I know that I interpreted the data that I presented. Of course, the transposition error, I would go back and check because it is specific enough as well as being a data entry error...
#44
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2018
Posts: 168
Grundt, gumpscheck, johnny knoxville, and Industry Strd have all posted in this thread with the implication that they are authors of the site under discussion. Different identities of the same person; they all seem to attack other posters in the same manner, use similar language, and reference new material put up or defend the source.
It is full of holes, incidentally, and OAI isn't a cargo company. Not all cargo operators are listed.
Which "author" will attack this time?
It is full of holes, incidentally, and OAI isn't a cargo company. Not all cargo operators are listed.
Which "author" will attack this time?
Appears onmi will be a cargo co! Also hard to say the contracts are wrong. So far don't see any contract paragraphs cited that are wrong. I wonder why? And I wonder why people seem to be so angry over data that is being put out to help pilots decide the best place to work and maybe pressure their union to raise the bar. Must be management worried pilots might actually work together!
#45
Originally Posted by midengineracer
The post stating that per diem was transposed between FedEX and UPS is a pretty good example. In the document I just downloaded, the per diem for FedEX was correct (from FedEX 5.A.1).
UPS monthly hourly guarantee, perdiem, international override and rigs are incorrect.
#47
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 429
#48
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 429
https://cargofacts.com/atsg-adds-777-platform-through-omni-air-acquisition/
Appears onmi will be a cargo co! Also hard to say the contracts are wrong. So far don't see any contract paragraphs cited that are wrong. I wonder why? And I wonder why people seem to be so angry over data that is being put out to help pilots decide the best place to work and maybe pressure their union to raise the bar. Must be management worried pilots might actually work together!
Appears onmi will be a cargo co! Also hard to say the contracts are wrong. So far don't see any contract paragraphs cited that are wrong. I wonder why? And I wonder why people seem to be so angry over data that is being put out to help pilots decide the best place to work and maybe pressure their union to raise the bar. Must be management worried pilots might actually work together!
#50
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2018
Posts: 168
After mutiple checks the ACMI rates are correct and way short of where they should be. And the retirement it's short too $
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post