Originally Posted by Rock

I've got nothing to base it on, but I wonder if our staffing level didn't shrink as a result of going from 3 seat cockpits to 100% 2 seat cockpits.
With regard to your point on our capturing some of the value of the efficiencies the company creates, I look at it differently than you. I hate it when people try to tell me what I am saying, so I am going to try to focus entirely on my perspective without implying what yours might be.
In my perspective, we are not entitled to any money the company generates beyond what the company is obligated to pay us in our contract. If FDX figures out how to net a trillion dollar a year profit, that doesn't change the value of the service I perform until they ask me to change what I do for them. If they change their manning model by reworking their network, but it doesn't require me to work outside my contract, I'm entitled to none of the profits they realize by doing so. With regard to lifestyle, I've moved through three airplanes, two seats and three bases before finding the right combination for my desired lifestyle. My schedules have never been less painful than they are now and I am not even close to the top half of our seniority list. I rabidly support people making their own decisions regarding their career progression at FedEx, but when I hear junior captains complaining about flying night hubturns, my pity is tempered to almost zero by the reality that nobody forced them to upgrade.
When I hear people argue that management salaries are bloated, my response is to tell them to go work in management. I'd rather stick my arm in a wood chipper. I don't care if our senior managers make $50 million a year and fly to work in gold plated helicopters. I don't want their jobs. And if I wanted their money...I would figure out how to move into their jobs. Frankly, most of them don't seem to be that bright (current manning problems being one indicator). So if their benefits are a goal, most of us could probably put ourselves on a path to move into their chairs and enjoy their benefits. But until we do, we aren't entitled to their benefits. We are entitled to OUR benefits.
Same thing with company profits. I fly airplanes for FedEx. I don't make longterm financial decisions for the company. If the people who do, do their jobs well and the company makes big profits...well did I mention that I fly airplanes for FedEx. I'm happy for them and happy for me, because a healthy company means I continue to get a paycheck.
In short, in my opinion, my job in the company does not entitle me to increased compensation because the company makes bigger profits. If that was something I believed in, I wouldn't have come to FedEx in the first place, because it wasn't in the contract I signed when I started working here, and it isn't in our contract now.
With all that being said, I would LOVE to see a provision in our contract that involves profit sharing. I believe the company would do itself a huge favor to move in that direction. Imagine the enthusiasm for a fuel savings program if individual crews were directly compensated for taxing on less than all engines or only running the APU when required for safety and comfort. Instead, the company asked us for a favor, we gave it a polite golf clap, and over time we're about back to where we started. Their request required our help, they didn't increase our compensation, so they are now getting what they paid for. That is ultimately, how you establish the value of your services. If someone requires your services, they'll pay what it takes to get them. If they don't, you can argue until you are blue in the face about how much they need you, but if you aren't willing to walk away...you need them as much as they need you. And that is a push as far as calculating compensation is concerned.
When people stop upgrading at their very first opportunity because life at the bottom of the bidpack sucks more than the pay raise, we'll have more power to negotiate a better contract. When everyone retires at their first opportunity because the pain of working at FedEx makes the reduced income from a pension a more attractive option, we'll have more power to negotiate a better contract. When FedEx can't hire anyone because no one wants to work under our work rules, we'll have more power to negotiate a better contract. But if our leading argument at the negotiating table is we should make more money because the company is making more money...we're back to even. The company will give us a polite golf clap, and we will end up essentially where we are now. Which, according to many no voters, is just fine.