Well, as you could expect there were some heated and not so heated comments directed at DW tonight. I thought there were some good points brought up by both sides, and I will add it stayed fairly professional all the way through...

DW stated that we negotiated to get our foot in the door. We want FedEx pilots on our seniority list flying our planes over there(I and I would haste to say, most of us agree).

He went on to say that he would like to have more than what we are getting in the way of a housing allowance, but in the face of having nothing, the 2700 was SOMETHING. He says this is a building block for the future, that if we have something, we can add to it based on profits, cost of living, etc, but if we start from nothing, and go into contract negotiations later, the company will likey reoffer the 2700 again.(make your own opinion on that one...) There were some arguments from the crowd about a B scale for those who go over there.

Sugestions about two seperate LOA's for each FDA...DW said the company may have more power of negotiation over one FDA than the other, so the MEC chose to make it one letter, but once again a building block by establishing something.

STV, well, I asked about this since it is near and dear to my heart as one of those junior guys. The loa states that the stv is in lieu of 24b2

1. Temporary Vacancy Posting
2. A temporary vacancy shall begin and end concurrent with a bid period. Temporary vacancies may not be utilized in a crew position for more than 4 bid periods during any calendar year.
3. A temporary vacancy posting shall specify the crew position(s) from which bids will be accepted and, if applicable, the number of bids which will be awarded at each domicile from which bids are accepted.
4. Temporary vacancies in a crew position shall be posted and awarded separately for each bid period.
5. A temporary vacancy may be utilized only at an existing non-FDA domicile.

well that is what is currently in our contract. No I can't go to an fda via the current contract, I can be sent to any of the other domiciles and junior manned. I can be inversed into siba. Now are some of the provisions under the loa a good deal if you get sent away, yeah, they do give you perdiem on your off days, company hotel, significant other visit(to include children). There is a little more, but the bottom line, through some talking with Tony C and DW, the company wants a way to ensure they can staff the domicile the first two years, and it was negotiated to make it the best for all parties involved. Siba is viewed as too costly and in the case of HKG unproductive.

I think after hearing some of the goals of the MEC, as stepping stones to future benefits, I can see more where they gave toward the companys side. There are also some unknown factors with foriegn governments and rules therin, that may make these domiciles costly to open.

I think the biggest thing I took away is to look at the facts. Reread the LOA. Read the sections that are referenced to be replaced. Read our CBA. Think about if we do shoot down this LOA, are we closing the door to more FedEx pilots flying our planes, or subletting. The LOA is no sparkling jewel, it is something that needs to be polished later, but I would say to relook at the facts and vote how you feel is right. I voted, I haven't changed it yet, but I am going to do some more research when I get some rest.

Flame away, as I'm sure you will

Haywood