I would like to give my 2 cringles worth on why I think this LOA is bad, bad, bad. I am not going to spin my words, just call it the way I see it.
The knowledge of new FDA's being opened has not been a secret, it has been known for awhile. Because of this fact, the NC should have had a little more due diligence in negotiating it. There have been hundreds that have been based at the Subic FDA since its opening, and the experience of these crew members has not, for the most part, been drawn upon. And, the Union should have been much, much more proactive in their negotiations AND in their communications to the pilots. They should have foreseen the ramifications of the ambiguous language and prepared a list of questions that would be asked over the course of the "debate" for or against the LOA. Then in turn, have answers prepared for those questions that would have alleviated any concerns brought up. This was not done. And, that is not good! To date, there are still many questions that cant be answered. Again, not good! Also, what were our openers. Still no answer to that question.
I dont see why the LOA gives a pilot two choices if someone decides to bid an FDA. First, what is termed as the current option; it is not really the current option if the LOA passes. It requires one to sign the FDA Agreement saying that you have to use tax equalization, among other things. Things that a lot of guys dont like. And, some of the ambiguous language is being used to claim that scope is enhanced. Many dont see that at all. If that were the case, then have SPECIFIC, UNAMBIGUOUS language stating as much. Very simple concept. Otherwise, the lawyers will disavow themselves of any obligation to follow what we think the language means. Way to many grey areas.
The enhanced option has many items that are not enhanced. Just my opinion. And I am certainly not alone. I wont go into all of the reasons. They have been stated here, and on this website...
www.airlinepilotforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=63
and this one...
www.fdxloa.com
So, why two choices? Why not take what is currently in the CBA and only add to it? And, add only things that are not construed to be concessionary? It really muddies the waters, for some anyway, when you need to decide if the whole package is good, bad, concessionary, etc. It could be viewed that the FDA was designed to divide, conquer, and certainly confuse. This LOA could be the poster boy, so to speak, for Keep It Simple Stupid!
The way it looks now, this might be a close vote. Whether it passes or not, it should not have been so divisive. Anything that is 50/50 is a bad thing. A clear majority is what is needed for this.
The argument that this is a stepping stone for next negotiations is just plain BS! The current section 6 is the baseline we have now; the stepping stone. The LOA should be a gain over what we have. A gain in all areas of section 6. FedEx is not in Chapter 11. They are making $$. They should be shelling out $$ for these FDA's to make even more $$!In many areas it is a step backwards. STV vs SIBA, tax equalization (for HKG anyway), only 500lbs move allowance, and many other things that have been brought up by others. I dont see how one could argue that in our next round of negotiations we will improve on the areas of this LOA that suck. If it will cost the Company, it wont be changed in our favor.....period.
Because of the appearance of a close vote (my belief), we have received quite a few emails from management and our Union officials doing a hard sell in favor of the LOA. This hard sell has been threatening, condescending, and just plain insulting. No way to be trying to convince me to vote yes. If anything, the letters should have clearly and unequivocally addressed the concerns that have been expressed by the membership in all the different mediums that these concerns have been expressed. Unfortunately, this has not been the case. And, how about equal time? Why isnt the SFS Rep allowed to use ALPA email and expand on his views of why he voted against? Our yes officials get free reign to spam us. It leaves a very bad taste in my mouth. The BS flag should be waving!
I have not heard of anyone saying that, overall, the majority of the items in the LOA are a real good thing, a step up from what we have. Another amber warning! If it is voted in, we could be dealing with a red warning. Where is the QRH to deal with that scenario?
Even though I truely appreciate the volunteers working on our behalf to secure a good LOA, they have missed their mark, IMO.
Read the CBA, read the LOA, ask questions.....and hopefully receive succinct answers, and then make an informed vote. For all of the ambiguous things in the LOA; plan on them not working in our favor. For me, the whole thing has been a major cluster you know what. I have concluded that if it walks, quacks, and looks like a POS.....it is. Go with your gut feeling.