Thread: Contract convo
View Single Post
Old 06-07-2024 | 07:41 AM
  #82  
JustInFacts
Line Holder
 
Joined: Aug 2023
Posts: 698
Likes: 55
Default

Originally Posted by BoilerUP
Yes, as I wrote in my post, FDX ALPA started negotiations in May 2021:
https://www.alpa.org/news-and-events/news-room/2024-05-30-fedex-pilots-informational-picket-memphis

May 2021 is later than September 2020, and pretty close to "mid-2021". We would not have started negotiating in September 2020 regardless due to the pandemic.

Yes, our 2020 extension did not exceed Delta until Sept 2022, but our rates achieved in the 2022 extension were industry leading at that time...they were eclipsed by pattern bargaining starting in early 2023. That's a good thing for everybody, right? FDX ALPA wasn't able to pattern off of Delta rates ratified months earlier, and as I showed in a post during your TA vote that showed if your TA'd payrates were weighted 82%WB/18%NB they were almost identical to UPS extension payrates.



Nope.

I'm saying 1. without the 2020 Extension, negotiations would have had a delayed start due to the pandemic, and 2. it is possible the NMB would have in some capacity paused mediated negotiation sessions while the Company was dealing with NLRB-governed Teamsters negotiations, a factor that no other airline including FDX has to deal with. The first is a fact borne out of "Act of God", the second is a personal gut feeling but hey, I've been wrong before.

Recapping:
  • IPA/UPS negotiations would not have started in September 2020 per our contract due to pandemic, they would have been delayed until mid-2021 (let's call it May 2021 to align with FDX negotiations)
  • The 2020 extension was to allow pattern bargaining in the passenger world to help move the bar, which we could pattern off of - rates we could then use as part of our negotiations after Teamsters Master was settled
  • The 2020 extension was announced on 10Feb20, as Asian factories were starting to shut down due to COVID and segments were being canceled left and right. During the ratification period, NOBODY knew what COVID would look like. The extension was generally regarded as a no-brainer here on APC by non-UPS pilots, when hundreds of passenger jets were parked with thousands of pilot jobs at risk
  • The 2020 extension was ratified by 98.86%
  • 2022 Extension came about because Company said they would not have the people controlling purse strings available for our negotiations until Q2'24 at the earliest due to Teamsters negotiations in 2023.
  • When the 2022 Extension came about, the only payrates to pattern off of were....UPS/IPA 2020 Extension payrates as FDX and the Big Four pax carriers were still negotiating.
  • 2022 Extension was ratified by 90.72%
  • We start formal Section 6 negotiations next week on 11 June

If you want to blame UPS/IPA contract extensions for FDX ALPA's failure to pattern off payrates Delta AIP'd in December 2022, well, knock yourself out if that gives you a boogeyman.
According to posts on this forum, you got your first TA contract extension in February 2020. That was at the very beginning of COVID. The shutdowns didn't start until March. So when you got that TA, you knew that you wouldn't be allowed to negotiate because of a pandemic that was in its early stages? In that thread, most reasons for agreeing were that UPS wouldn't negotiate until the teamsters settled their contract that came up in the summer of 2023.

As far as pattern bargaining goes, if you were pattern bargaining, shouldn't your 2021 rate have been higher than Delta's 2019 rate? Using your logic, Fedex could take a $420 rate and 3% raises through 2029, and claim the same thing you are. That 2029 rate would be the highest in the industry, though it would be 3 years after Delta. Everyone could pattern bargain off of that. IPA wasn't able to deliver higher rates until they were stale by 45 months.

I hope the best for you guys. Ideally, you would get a new contract this fall that exceeded Delta's. Then Fedex couldn't use your last two contract extensions as industry standard.
Reply