Alpa Fdx
 

After reading Dave Webb's email this evening, I interpret this to mean that FDX ALPA has now switched sides over the age 60 issue and is recommending a change because:

1. It's inevitable
2. They want to have a say in the implementation of the rule

Also, he said that they are "stridently opposed to any regulatory change that prohibits a pilot from exercising their seniority rights."

I interpret this to mean that when the rule changes, anyone, regardless of age, will be able to exercise their seniority and bid the left seat.

Good luck fellow FDX'ers, it's going to be a painful ride because:

If you're junior (meaning both not a captain and/or junior in your current seat), you are going to be junior a very long time.

Please correct me if I am wrong in my interpretations.

Dave Webb is absolutely hardover on the idea that the guys CURRENTLY on the panel be allowed to come back to the left seat.

Not only is this freezing our careers, it is putting them in reverse.

This is going to blow our relatively united pilot group into smithereens.

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 was under the impression that the telephone pole that yielded the 52% number was by invitation only, not the current ALPA survey that ALL of us are entitled to voice our opinions.

Seems extremely biased that the union would pass a resolution WITHOUT the results of the survey we took as a union (meaning together, not a select few of invitees).

I think you're wrong bud. This is going to get passed this summer in congress. We lost Inouye, and a bunch others that were on our side. And the company won't be running a MOAB until this thing shakes out anyway.

Nice post Albie.

I guess I am just parsing DW's email, but he said the poll found 52% in favor with 3% margin of error, so he called it a dead heat. But does that automatically mean that 48% were against? Weren't there any "Don't know" voters. I guess I am just saying that I would like to see the breakdown so that I have a better understanding of what they have found.

I am against all of the back seaters losing their seniority. Use it to bid each and every month for your engineer line, and I will never complain a bit.:D Honestly though, it is quite a windfall for these characters. It has been said, but these guys advanced while everyone senior to them left at sixty, and now they get to feast at the top of the list for 5 extra years. With all of the cost savings the company is pushing, is it really expected that the company should have to bear the retraining costs for about 200 guys? What kind of cost are we talking about that will come right off the bottom line - and all though I can't be called the biggest company man, is it right that Fedex should bear that burden?

What this means is to a greater extent then ever, our MEC (and National) need to proceed with a great deal of transparency and open dialog. The impression of a pre-set outcome or collusion within certain groups, even if not valid, will undermine the support and credibility of this union for decades.

I've made calls on this issue, and whatever side you are on...you should too. Win or lose--we've got to be together on the back side of this. The ONLY way to do that is is EVERYONE feels like the process was fair and open.

Regretfully...I don't see that now. I'm trying to keep an open mind. I'm contacting my LEC/MEC folks. I'm "discussing" this in professional terms. But ALPA needs to stop coming out of a smokey room with "pronouncements" and start allowing membership to see this process.

So far...the only thing I've thought when I read Wally's diatribe and this latest letter was "kiss my @ss...." Anyone who knows me and how I've supported the ALPA team knows I'm not a rebel or a malcontent. We just need to make sure there is a bit more open discussion. I figure if it gets under MY skin, there are some VERY fired up people tonight around MEM.

An irony--funny or not--is this latest push to increase the age by ALPA helps a tremendous number of older non-members. They are again reaping the rewards of someone else's efforts...

They pass this wherein the over 60 guys get rights back to a front seat...I become a non-member. End of discussion.

You bet... we're going to be talking about this last poll - with the change in password procedures - in twenty years. My distinct impression is that the poll was merely window-dressing. The policy was already decided. Am I wrong? Answer me this: 52% wasn't enough for Dave. What percentage WOULD have been enough? 55? 60? 65? This is called shooting a moving target.

You wont' be the only one. There will be a lot more just like you. And all of us lose.

I don't think you should quit. But I've had the same thought too at times, and I understand the sentiment. I also think the union needs to push for some ways to offset some of the damage.

If we cannot stay united--contact 2010 will be a joke. THIS kind of sentiment is exactly why the union needs to find a way to take care of everyone....not just the top half.

Sleepy? You listenin'? Your work didn't quit with the last contract. You need to let these old men know--in fighter pilot terms--how important it is to keep this group together. The letters I've seen from the MEC Chair and Vice are VERY out of touch with the guys like hamfisted we know are out there.

Single issue mentality
 

There are a lot of issues on the CBA/National legistlation table right now. If you quit over 1 issue you lose all say in your future and the pilot group loses some collective power.
The way to challenge any process is to talk to your LEC/MEC reps and give them solutions.

It's pretty hard to talk when nobody listens. I understand your point, but when decisions are consistently made in a collusive manner outside of the majority, why follow a process that has zero chance of success?

Think about what your saying. First if ALPA had that much pull, the AGE 60 thing would be dead.

The AGE 60 thing is coming with out without ALPA (like that term?)

If the rule change allows the over 60 guys to come back, so be it, if it doesn't is doesn't. Bottom line is this is a seniority based system and seniority is defined in the contract.

If the FAA rule does allow them to come back, that doesn't mean FEDEX will aloow them to, but they might have to pay passover pay, and I believe ALPA would fight for that..........and they should.

Who is your Block Rep?........ do you even know?
Have you writen him? are you saying you have recieved no response?

I have walked the line in a couple of cities, worn a red lanyard and been extremely pro union all aliong. However this latest Webb letter smacks of personal agendas and back room collusion, all in defiance of the majority of members in a supposedly democratic institution. Historically, When the powers that be become dictators, a revolt is most definitely called for.
I am open to suggestions, to include hamfisted's fix.
anybody else?-
Los1:mad:

Only response I have received is a condascending email from the Vice Chairman.

Hoffa went to sleep with the fishes for a reason (must be said in a Italian accent). We're a organized labor group, maybe we should act like one.. Something along the lines of busting kneecaps might get the MEC to listen a little better. :eek:

THIS IS ONLY HUMOR. NO ACTUAL THREATS ARE BEING IMPLIED, SUGGESTED, OR OTHERWISE RECOMMENDED.

RLA process
 

We follow the RLA process because it is the only one we have that protects our jobs, benefits, etc...

The alternative is to have FredEx make work rules and pay raises whenever they see fit(FCH). We don't want to go there(again).

The MEC is the pilots' voice. I don't believe they are being collusive. They are trying to participate in an NPRM process that will affect us for a long time.

Out of touch? You mean like telling us that city commonality and same city deadheads are not important?

Becoming a non-member isn't going to do you any good. You'll still be paying dues and for sure no one is going to listen to you.

We all need to contact our block reps and let them know our feelings on this.

Actually the telephone poll is much more accurate because it is a sampling of all seniority levels in all seats.

The webb poll is nothing more than a survey. If the majority of the pilots who took the web survey were JR (or senior) then it would skew the results.

The Wilson center is very accurate on telephone poll #'s.

Yeah, whatever. Do you know what the distribution of invitees were in that telephone poll?

This poll hasn't even closed yet.
 

Our union has decided our position before the poll closes on MAY 10th. A poll that allowed everyone to have a voice. I think I missed something in Union 101. My loss of confidence is staggering.

Again--down the road...this sentiment could be as detrimental to our long term success as the NPRM could be. It is EXACTLY why we need our union leadership...while we use a REPUBLIC model...to make sure DEMOCRATIC principals are demonstrated.

Old guys--this loss of confidence affects you too. If you want someone who isn't going to sell you out for 20 pieces of silver the day you retire, we need to find a way if this passes to keep everyone onboard. The "get used to it...senioirity rules...shut your yap we know what's best for you..." type vibe will destroy the union. It's hard enough to make things work with 97% membership and a (general) consensus. I honestly believe this has more potential to damage the union than even a strike vote. Whatever side "wins" (and I've often said its a zero sum game) better find a way to extend the olive branch to the other side--pronto...or we are heading towards a real division. The FOs on the property won't just "get used to it..." or "forget about it..." after a week. Don't believe me? How many guys have heard a pre-88 FedEx guy say "I still haven't gotten back my original seniority yet..."

Its going to take some serious work on all sides to hang together. I haven't seen ANYTHING from the side with the large lead in the 3rd quarter yet that indicates they will be gracious winners.

I can't believe anyone believes this poll.....for that matter any that the union has done....
I'm 57 and I don't believe that poll...It all depends on how you ask the question and who you ask....The union NEVER releases the data ...I wonder why?

So, if things mostly controlled by the federal government don't go your way, you'll become a non-member? I don't always agree with ALPA policy, going back to events almost 20 years ago. In fact, I voted against going back to them. But I sure didn't up and quit when things didn't go my way.
Well, under criteria established in another thread, you are acting Scabalicious. So don't let the door hit you in the A** on the way out. All the rest of you like-minded youngsters, too.

Is that what you want HIM to say to you or about you in 2020 when the company decides retirees no longer qualify for (fill in which one) benefits? Do you want guys on the property then that support not only those behind them but those that retired in front of them too?


Plenty of us will TUG on those guys to stay and support. Are you going to try to do anything about this change but say "**** and deal with it?" If you do that...guys like 42GO who seem to delight in publically attacking and undermining the MEC are going to have an easier and easier time dismantling the trust and effectiveness garnered 2002-2006.

This and Hamfisted comments reek of ignorance and emotionalism. It is called the power of the vote my friends. Vote 'em out.

If you are pro union LOS, then use the union system. There are ways to recall a sitting MEC chairman.

You had me 'till you said I am open to Hamfisted's fix. That has quitter and loser written all over it.

Your 57 and I suppose you can't believe your Union got you a pay raise and an increased B Fund and enhaced retirement benefits with an increased multiplier for pilots over 50 (thats you BTW), ) and retiree medical on this last contract..........and your signing bonus (or retro or what ever you want to call it)

AS For the latter part of your post, Thats BS and you know it. We have had 4 surveys done at FDX that I know of by the Wilson Center.


The most recent FDX only poll was the Pre-contact survey taken in 2003/2004. They held that data for Strategic reasons because they didn't want to give #'s to the company, but later released it.

The Survey before that was the FPA/ALPA merger poll in 2001. The Wilson center called that one right on the money.........they released that data.

The Poll before that was if ALPA #1 was going to lose to FPA and be decertified. There was no need to release that data, but the wilson center was within 1% of the actual vote.

The Poll before that was to determine if the Fedex pilots wanted to Unionize and with whom. That one was done in 1992. The Wislon center called that one within 2% as I recall.

This most recent telephone poll by the Wilson Center was ALPA wide, not just FDX.
There is no reason to lie about the data and quite frankly, the results weren't all that surprising and you know it.

If he thinks any issue's affects on him are important enough to bail out of the union, I don't give a rats what he says in 2020, because he'll be a non-member. He's using the same rational that all non-members or scabs use. "Because of my situation, I'm going to ignore the rest of you and do my own thing." And as many have said in the past, I don't plan on relying on the company for my financial well-being after I hit the door. If the A plan and medical are there, great, but I'm sure not counting on it.


And of course, you assume I'm in the 52% that want to keep age 60. I could possibly be welcoming the changes.

Let me bottom-line this for you:

If you're a captain now, you'll be a captain for five more years.

If you're an F/O, you'll be an F/O for five more years.


Those in the first group run the union, the blue-ribbon commission and the company. They can talk about unity, the good of the profession and how the youngsters need to take it like a man - it's easy, because someone else's ox is being gored.

Those in the second group are going to lose tens of thousands of dollars, or more, over this. But someday WE'LL run the union, the blue-ribbon commissions and the company. And the elephant never forgets.

Oh and if Capt. Webb gets his way, about 100 of the junior guys in the first group will get bumped back to the second group.....

I wonder if there is a significant lawsuit threat if "seniority" was to be excepted for the oldtimers wanting to return. Is this position not contrary to what the FAA has indicated would be their position? Also, is this opinion our MEC's alone or is this the ALPA national opinion also.. i.e. that the 60 - 65 year olds are to be allowed to bid back to the left seat?
I have to admit this has got the potential to be a major bombshell here.. I don't agree with it and i am one of those that it will not affect much.

All of you with concerns/questions, please feel free to contact your friendly SPC Chairman. Phone number is available on the website or from the 866-FDX-ALPA number. Oh, Albie has it also. Cheers.

That's it. We can **** and moan all day here, but call your Reps. If you think it's BS, tell them. I just reread Webb's letter and the part that really stings is where he alludes to guys being able to bid back to the left seat once they have already left. This has a huge potential to fracture the solidarity that we have. Without that, we are screwed in everything else that comes down the pipe.

Haz

What happened to age 60 being in our contract and having to be renegotiated here regardless of the FAA policy change? Especially the part about those already over 60? I will gladly contribute to and do whatever needs to be done to recall Dave Webb and anyone else if they insist on ignoring all pilots under age 60 when the age change comes. At the very least he better allow a vote on the issue to see how the members feel. When you consider how many non members are over 60 and in the back seat it makes me even angrier! Quitting the union isn't the answer. Demanding the majority be heard is. This is total BS and needs to be addressed now. MEC members and Reps need to be contacted demanding a vote be put out before such a huge change is made or we need to recall the whole bunch of them.

I don't normally do this, but this is important so the SPC Chairman told me to pass this on. So here it is, call him at 901-338-1974 and he'll talk til he passes out from exhaustion.

Oh, if you've expressed an opinion one way or the other on here, I expect you to call me and let me know who your screen name is so I can try to answer your concerns. If you don't call, I'll let Albie know.

I emailed my block rep and the MEC board - which included Dave......looking forward to their response.

Say NO to over 60 guys retraining in the front seat - they had their time.

I find it hard to understand what you guys don't understand. The guys that went back to the S/O seat never left, never lost their seniority rights because they turned age 60. They moved to a lower position due to the fact that FAA regulations did not permit them to keep the left or right seat. If any of you younger guys ever had a medical issue that caused the FAA to restrict you to the S/O seat do you think you should have the right to return to the left or right seat if that restriction is lifted?

The bottom line is that the guys that went back to the S/O seat never gave up their seniority. Now if you guys want to give up on the seniority system go for it. We could work on upgrades by lottery, or a rotating seniority system where you rise to number one for one month and then you drop to the bottom of the list to start working your way back up the list one month at a time. We could call it "shared seniority":rolleyes:

guys...ease up..like i said before i have heard from a few people that attended the ARAC meetings...the ATA does not want this...over 60 guys will not be allowed to bid back...but if they want to spend their golden years in a 727 at 3am pouring coffee..so be it!

Soo..... giving up on it is bad. But modifying it so you get a windfall is ok?

I love the seniority system - you know, the old one, the one where guys got out at sixty.

p.s.:

Here's a future poll question, say about 2017:

We know that the membership wants to protect the benefits of our retirees - 52% of you said this in our Wilson poll. But if the company says that benefit reductions for retirees are inevitable, should ALPA be involved in the process or not?

Sorry Mark, but one senior official is reported to have said that FedEx intends to return any S/O to their former position when the regulated age changes if the has been out of the front seat for less than 24 months.