Alpa Fdx
05-06-2007 | 01:45 PM
#141
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Let me preface this by saying I am not attacking the integrity or abilities of any person who may oppose my opinion. The personal attacks on this board shock me at times but don't deter my desire to voice my opinion.
The Age 60 debacle has become an ALPA quagmire. I trusted their intentions all the way up until they announced their support bringing those over 60 from the back seat to the front seats upon the passage of this pending legislation. Despite the smoke and mirrors process used to arrive at ALPA's decision to "support" the Age 60 to 65 legislation; I figured the majority had spoken...kind of, sort of.
However, their decision to also support this aspect of the legislation allowing over age 60 pilots to move back to the front seats has received absolutely no discussion from the general membership.
At no time have I been queried on how I feel about allowing this group of pilots to move back to the front seat. I would think that, as a Fedex pilot; a group significantly impacted by this position; I would have had the chance to voice my opinion before my MEC adopted a position for me.
Why would I quit the Union over this?
I simply feel that this was an issue that was blatantly manilulated to benefit and pacify a very small group of existing pilots with zero concern over how those most significantly impacted would react or respond to this slight. They count on me closing my pie hole and shrugging my shoulders while I place my faith and dollars in their future decision-making. I have zero faith in the integrity of the system or process used to gauge my stance or opinions on ALPA related topics. Why continue to financially support a political institution that ignores the voice of the vast majority of it's membership?
The Age 60 debacle has become an ALPA quagmire. I trusted their intentions all the way up until they announced their support bringing those over 60 from the back seat to the front seats upon the passage of this pending legislation. Despite the smoke and mirrors process used to arrive at ALPA's decision to "support" the Age 60 to 65 legislation; I figured the majority had spoken...kind of, sort of.
However, their decision to also support this aspect of the legislation allowing over age 60 pilots to move back to the front seats has received absolutely no discussion from the general membership.
At no time have I been queried on how I feel about allowing this group of pilots to move back to the front seat. I would think that, as a Fedex pilot; a group significantly impacted by this position; I would have had the chance to voice my opinion before my MEC adopted a position for me.
Why would I quit the Union over this?
I simply feel that this was an issue that was blatantly manilulated to benefit and pacify a very small group of existing pilots with zero concern over how those most significantly impacted would react or respond to this slight. They count on me closing my pie hole and shrugging my shoulders while I place my faith and dollars in their future decision-making. I have zero faith in the integrity of the system or process used to gauge my stance or opinions on ALPA related topics. Why continue to financially support a political institution that ignores the voice of the vast majority of it's membership?
05-06-2007 | 02:03 PM
#142
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 980
Likes: 0
From: Retired
It also means a serious erosion in support for the future of our MEC if we don't tread very carefully.
I had a talk with an MEC rep two weeks ago about this very issue. If ALPA is going to "roll over" and say its enevitable, and provide a windfall for some captains, then we need to look at how our compensation package is structured. There are a lot of people who are going to take a career earnings hit on this, and perhaps one way to offset some of it is shrink the gap in pay between the left and right seat.
Now...I know the idea is blasphasmous in a lot of ways--but roll with this argument and hang with me a bit.
First--this is NO way diminshes the respect for the guy in the left seat who has the ultimate decision authority and responsibility. I'm a single seat guy--you don't have to explain to me the responsibility that goes with being captain of the vessel. Every guy on our property has been a captain somewhere.
However--there has been a very large earnings windfall for a select group of pilots--period. If that group chooses to patronize and say "well...seniority says I can do this....we've always done it this way....you'll get yours later...." AFTER winning the 5 bonus year lottery, they cannot help but expect some backlash. WHO is going to be be supporting ALPA in 2015? In 2020? In 2025? Who is going to fight (like our MEC did) to improve retiree care and post retirement benefits? If we do it right--it will be those junior guys who are now FOs. If we don't...division is going to take place on a level not seen since the first attempt to unionize.
If we don't find a way to soften the sting we just placed on about 52% (+/- 3 percent according to the email) of our dues paying members, then we have gutted our long term support for the short term gains. I am afraid that will come home to roost in support for future ALPA and MEC level issues.
I'm about 100 numbers from captain on the last bid. I don't think this change will keep me from "getting mine" if I want it. However--I want--and need--a strong union supporting our crew force five, ten, and fifteen years down the road. More than half of the crew force just got screwed. Sorry--that's life. We are big boys and understand the rules. However--if we are run roughshod over AFTER the legislation change and told "its for our own good" by our own union, you cannot but expect the junior pilots to eventually question what's in it for them, and are there other alternatives?
In my opinion, our next contract needs to address this by providing a larger gain for the right seat than the left. In other words--some of the "gains" of this windfall need to be passed down. Can it be equal? Probably not. However--grabbing a handful of cake off the table and refusing to even pass any crumbs to anyone else at dinner is not only bad form, it sows the seeds of revolution. We better find a way to at least share some of that cake or the natives will soon be at the door with torches and pitchforks.
...and for what its worth...I want to support the current team. However--I own a ranch and know how to use kerosene too. I like ALPA because ALPA is OUR union at the moment. However--I've still got my FPA pins, and my buddies who are teamsters, IPA, or SWAPA all have axes to grind with national. I hope we don't forget where we came from...
I had a talk with an MEC rep two weeks ago about this very issue. If ALPA is going to "roll over" and say its enevitable, and provide a windfall for some captains, then we need to look at how our compensation package is structured. There are a lot of people who are going to take a career earnings hit on this, and perhaps one way to offset some of it is shrink the gap in pay between the left and right seat.
Now...I know the idea is blasphasmous in a lot of ways--but roll with this argument and hang with me a bit.
First--this is NO way diminshes the respect for the guy in the left seat who has the ultimate decision authority and responsibility. I'm a single seat guy--you don't have to explain to me the responsibility that goes with being captain of the vessel. Every guy on our property has been a captain somewhere.
However--there has been a very large earnings windfall for a select group of pilots--period. If that group chooses to patronize and say "well...seniority says I can do this....we've always done it this way....you'll get yours later...." AFTER winning the 5 bonus year lottery, they cannot help but expect some backlash. WHO is going to be be supporting ALPA in 2015? In 2020? In 2025? Who is going to fight (like our MEC did) to improve retiree care and post retirement benefits? If we do it right--it will be those junior guys who are now FOs. If we don't...division is going to take place on a level not seen since the first attempt to unionize.
If we don't find a way to soften the sting we just placed on about 52% (+/- 3 percent according to the email) of our dues paying members, then we have gutted our long term support for the short term gains. I am afraid that will come home to roost in support for future ALPA and MEC level issues.
I'm about 100 numbers from captain on the last bid. I don't think this change will keep me from "getting mine" if I want it. However--I want--and need--a strong union supporting our crew force five, ten, and fifteen years down the road. More than half of the crew force just got screwed. Sorry--that's life. We are big boys and understand the rules. However--if we are run roughshod over AFTER the legislation change and told "its for our own good" by our own union, you cannot but expect the junior pilots to eventually question what's in it for them, and are there other alternatives?
In my opinion, our next contract needs to address this by providing a larger gain for the right seat than the left. In other words--some of the "gains" of this windfall need to be passed down. Can it be equal? Probably not. However--grabbing a handful of cake off the table and refusing to even pass any crumbs to anyone else at dinner is not only bad form, it sows the seeds of revolution. We better find a way to at least share some of that cake or the natives will soon be at the door with torches and pitchforks.
...and for what its worth...I want to support the current team. However--I own a ranch and know how to use kerosene too. I like ALPA because ALPA is OUR union at the moment. However--I've still got my FPA pins, and my buddies who are teamsters, IPA, or SWAPA all have axes to grind with national. I hope we don't forget where we came from...
I spent many years being junior and on furlough and know how I would have felt. That being said, the world has changed, age 60 today is not what it was in 1959. ICAO made the change after many years of consideration. The FAA approved foreign pilots up to age 65 on November 23, 2006. The FAA recognized that the current rule was not acceptable and announced that on January 30, 2007.
The leadership at both National and the MEC level is now dealing with reality. Many of the posts show that many just cannot bring themselves to accept the change is coming, and it is coming in the very near future. The ALPA and the leadership has an obligation to represent all FedEx pilots. That includes the S/Os that happen to be over age 60. When the regulated age changes to 65 their entitlements will be based on their seniority. There may be training restictions based on how close they are to the new regulated age and hose individuals may not get to return but they should be pay protected.
Are we seeing the train wreck that some have talked about? http://airlinepilotforums.com/showthread.php?t=6491
Or are we seeing a leadership that can see around the bend and is trying to switch tracks so we only have a close call?
05-06-2007 | 03:08 PM
#144
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,068
Likes: 0
If you did, you sure have a case of the Welch's sour grapes. As someone who fits similar shoes, should I look forward to one day ignoring whence I came and grabbing all I can regardless of what is right or what I have believed is right for so long? If your answer is yes, be secure in the knowledge that 5yrs or 10 more, I will eventually have the handle to the guiottine that holds either your A fund, your health benefits or both. Close cover before strike.
Last edited by Daniel Larusso; 05-06-2007 at 03:14 PM.
05-06-2007 | 04:45 PM
#145
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
From: 57 Capt
Let me preface this by saying I am not attacking the integrity or abilities of any person who may oppose my opinion. The personal attacks on this board shock me at times but don't deter my desire to voice my opinion.
The Age 60 debacle has become an ALPA quagmire. I trusted their intentions all the way up until they announced their support bringing those over 60 from the back seat to the front seats upon the passage of this pending legislation. Despite the smoke and mirrors process used to arrive at ALPA's decision to "support" the Age 60 to 65 legislation; I figured the majority had spoken...kind of, sort of.
However, their decision to also support this aspect of the legislation allowing over age 60 pilots to move back to the front seats has received absolutely no discussion from the general membership.
At no time have I been queried on how I feel about allowing this group of pilots to move back to the front seat. I would think that, as a Fedex pilot; a group significantly impacted by this position; I would have had the chance to voice my opinion before my MEC adopted a position for me.
Why would I quit the Union over this?
I simply feel that this was an issue that was blatantly manilulated to benefit and pacify a very small group of existing pilots with zero concern over how those most significantly impacted would react or respond to this slight. They count on me closing my pie hole and shrugging my shoulders while I place my faith and dollars in their future decision-making. I have zero faith in the integrity of the system or process used to gauge my stance or opinions on ALPA related topics. Why continue to financially support a political institution that ignores the voice of the vast majority of it's membership?
The Age 60 debacle has become an ALPA quagmire. I trusted their intentions all the way up until they announced their support bringing those over 60 from the back seat to the front seats upon the passage of this pending legislation. Despite the smoke and mirrors process used to arrive at ALPA's decision to "support" the Age 60 to 65 legislation; I figured the majority had spoken...kind of, sort of.
However, their decision to also support this aspect of the legislation allowing over age 60 pilots to move back to the front seats has received absolutely no discussion from the general membership.
At no time have I been queried on how I feel about allowing this group of pilots to move back to the front seat. I would think that, as a Fedex pilot; a group significantly impacted by this position; I would have had the chance to voice my opinion before my MEC adopted a position for me.
Why would I quit the Union over this?
I simply feel that this was an issue that was blatantly manilulated to benefit and pacify a very small group of existing pilots with zero concern over how those most significantly impacted would react or respond to this slight. They count on me closing my pie hole and shrugging my shoulders while I place my faith and dollars in their future decision-making. I have zero faith in the integrity of the system or process used to gauge my stance or opinions on ALPA related topics. Why continue to financially support a political institution that ignores the voice of the vast majority of it's membership?
i couldn't agree more. make sure you email your lec/block reps and make your voice heard. they need to know the extent of the anger with the chairman's message. we also need to press for a vote on this issue...it can't just be at the whim of the mec chairman.
let's put the mec to the test and see if they respond responsibly, or just spout rhetoric.
pdo
05-06-2007 | 06:04 PM
#146
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 2,889
Likes: 1
The optimist in me might speculate that by verbally accepting over 60 guys going BACK, DW might be playing poker and trying to win those guys some passover pay. The company WILL NOT pay that if it thinks these guys REALLY WOULDN'T accept going back to training. Therefore--to get these guys the extra pay--the union HAS to take the position "of course they can go back...their seniority allows it..."
However--its a high stakes poker game and I can't read DW's eyes. What I do know is that I have ZERO problem with any over 60 guy getting paid as a captain to plumb whatever jet he's currently on. Hell...its a windfall that doesn't hurt anyone but the company's shareholders in the long run. I think we are profitable enough with the optimizer working as hard as it is to absorb those losses.
If, however...DW "really" wants those guys flowing back...we got a real problem. I know a good poker player can't show his hand to other guys at the table, but he really does need to be more clear about the rationale behind his moves.
Old guy or new hire--we've got to be together in the end. Right now I haven't seen anyone throw the junior guys a bone. I'll I've seen them do is say "....we had it tough....shut up and color...etc..." I'd like to see a way to somehow divide some of the spoils of the 5 year career extension some folks are getting.
However--its a high stakes poker game and I can't read DW's eyes. What I do know is that I have ZERO problem with any over 60 guy getting paid as a captain to plumb whatever jet he's currently on. Hell...its a windfall that doesn't hurt anyone but the company's shareholders in the long run. I think we are profitable enough with the optimizer working as hard as it is to absorb those losses.
If, however...DW "really" wants those guys flowing back...we got a real problem. I know a good poker player can't show his hand to other guys at the table, but he really does need to be more clear about the rationale behind his moves.
Old guy or new hire--we've got to be together in the end. Right now I haven't seen anyone throw the junior guys a bone. I'll I've seen them do is say "....we had it tough....shut up and color...etc..." I'd like to see a way to somehow divide some of the spoils of the 5 year career extension some folks are getting.
05-06-2007 | 06:36 PM
#147
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Where did I miss the "seniortiy" structure in our union? I thought every dues paying member had the same voice! Seniority only applies with respect to our position on the master seniority list. That is administered by FedEx, NOT ALPA!
If DW thinks I have been paying dues to maintain my "seniority" in the union, he is seriously mistaken! WHAT IS GOING ON! If the majority of us think our union should advocate NOT bringing back over 60 guys, then that's what our reps should be focusing on.
If DW thinks I have been paying dues to maintain my "seniority" in the union, he is seriously mistaken! WHAT IS GOING ON! If the majority of us think our union should advocate NOT bringing back over 60 guys, then that's what our reps should be focusing on.
05-06-2007 | 06:37 PM
#148
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
From: Left to right
Problem vs. Solution
Why would I quit the Union over this?
I simply feel that this was an issue that was blatantly manilulated to benefit and pacify a very small group of existing pilots with zero concern over how those most significantly impacted would react or respond to this slight. They count on me closing my pie hole and shrugging my shoulders while I place my faith and dollars in their future decision-making. I have zero faith in the integrity of the system or process used to gauge my stance or opinions on ALPA related topics. Why continue to financially support a political institution that ignores the voice of the vast majority of it's membership?[/quote]
Stop whining. Have you volunteered for an LEC position?
When the game doesn't go your way do you take your ball and go home?
If you feel you are in the wronged majority then recall the MEC leadership.
Good luck.
I simply feel that this was an issue that was blatantly manilulated to benefit and pacify a very small group of existing pilots with zero concern over how those most significantly impacted would react or respond to this slight. They count on me closing my pie hole and shrugging my shoulders while I place my faith and dollars in their future decision-making. I have zero faith in the integrity of the system or process used to gauge my stance or opinions on ALPA related topics. Why continue to financially support a political institution that ignores the voice of the vast majority of it's membership?[/quote]
Stop whining. Have you volunteered for an LEC position?
When the game doesn't go your way do you take your ball and go home?
If you feel you are in the wronged majority then recall the MEC leadership.
Good luck.
05-06-2007 | 07:03 PM
#149
Line Holder
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Stop whining. Have you volunteered for an LEC position?
Good luck.[/QUOTE]
Some of us have Attempted to volunteer, but for whatever reason, were not invited into the inner sanctum..makes one wonder. Methinks DW and his cronies practiced a "closed shop" prior to obtaining one on the last contract.
Good luck.[/QUOTE]
Some of us have Attempted to volunteer, but for whatever reason, were not invited into the inner sanctum..makes one wonder. Methinks DW and his cronies practiced a "closed shop" prior to obtaining one on the last contract.
05-06-2007 | 07:46 PM
#150
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
From: MD-11 Capt
The optimist in me might speculate that by verbally accepting over 60 guys going BACK, DW might be playing poker and trying to win those guys some passover pay. The company WILL NOT pay that if it thinks these guys REALLY WOULDN'T accept going back to training. Therefore--to get these guys the extra pay--the union HAS to take the position "of course they can go back...their seniority allows it..."
However--its a high stakes poker game and I can't read DW's eyes. What I do know is that I have ZERO problem with any over 60 guy getting paid as a captain to plumb whatever jet he's currently on. Hell...its a windfall that doesn't hurt anyone but the company's shareholders in the long run. I think we are profitable enough with the optimizer working as hard as it is to absorb those losses.
If, however...DW "really" wants those guys flowing back...we got a real problem. I know a good poker player can't show his hand to other guys at the table, but he really does need to be more clear about the rationale behind his moves.
Old guy or new hire--we've got to be together in the end. Right now I haven't seen anyone throw the junior guys a bone. I'll I've seen them do is say "....we had it tough....shut up and color...etc..." I'd like to see a way to somehow divide some of the spoils of the 5 year career extension some folks are getting.
However--its a high stakes poker game and I can't read DW's eyes. What I do know is that I have ZERO problem with any over 60 guy getting paid as a captain to plumb whatever jet he's currently on. Hell...its a windfall that doesn't hurt anyone but the company's shareholders in the long run. I think we are profitable enough with the optimizer working as hard as it is to absorb those losses.
If, however...DW "really" wants those guys flowing back...we got a real problem. I know a good poker player can't show his hand to other guys at the table, but he really does need to be more clear about the rationale behind his moves.
Old guy or new hire--we've got to be together in the end. Right now I haven't seen anyone throw the junior guys a bone. I'll I've seen them do is say "....we had it tough....shut up and color...etc..." I'd like to see a way to somehow divide some of the spoils of the 5 year career extension some folks are getting.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
