Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Cargo
Poll - How will you vote on the new FDX FDA LOA? >

Poll - How will you vote on the new FDX FDA LOA?

Notices
Cargo Part 121 cargo airlines
View Poll Results: How will you vote on the proposed FDX FDA LOA?
YES
41
15.89%
NO
217
84.11%
Voters: 258. You may not vote on this poll

Poll - How will you vote on the new FDX FDA LOA?

Old 06-29-2007, 12:01 AM
  #21  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Micro's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Drinking from the fire hose
Posts: 305
Default

Originally Posted by viperdriver View Post
Why not just vote yes and not bid it?

If we vote no--the company can hire into those positions, or outsource the flying.

Scope? We may lose on that one since we were offered the flying and said no thanks.

I think the STV is a scarier prospect. Sounds like the company can "deploy" you three out of 18 months. Hmmm that sounds familiar to my previous life.
The voting yes and hoping guys will not bid it is a pipe dream. If you think the LOA is unacceptable then just vote NO! Voting down the LOA has nothing to do with scope. Scope MAY come into the picture only if no one bids the flying but has nothing to do with the LOA. The company can open these FDA's with or without this LOA. My question is if the company could open these FDA's uder the current contract then why are they coming to us and offering more money in an LOA if they don't have to. Maybe the answer is that they don't want foreign nationals flying our freight (no RLA or only US laws for them) and/ or the service failures associated with contracted flying is unacceptable.
Micro is offline  
Old 06-29-2007, 04:02 AM
  #22  
Gets Weekends Off
 
MaydayMark's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: MD-11 Captain
Posts: 4,304
Default

I'm really trying to keep emotion out of this discussion and consider the LOA on it's merits ...

I think the LOA is grossly inadequate. That said, if I vote NO then the company can (maybe will?) fill the vacancies with new hires who will through no fault of their own, take some of the very good MD-11 Asia flying. This would make me relatively more junior in my current position ... bad deal for me.

Assuming the LOA passes, at least some, maybe many of the positions would be filled with current seniority list pilots senior to me, making me relatively more senior in my current position ... better deal.

That's one perspective ... another thought of mine is that I "might" be interested in bidding a FDA. No kids at home anymore, it might be fun living overseas for a few years. This LOA IS NOT FINANCIALLY ATTRACTIVE! I will lose money bidding it and that just doesn't seem right to me. The company can and should be picking up more of the financial burden that living in these cities will cause. A military 0-4 gets over $5850 housing allowance in HKG and another $493 for utilities (I believe he gets a COLA on top of that also but I haven't been able to document the amount yet). That's over twice what the company is offering us ... that just doesn't seem "right" to me.

Will the company buy my current house? No

Will the LOA cover even half the cost of my rent in HKG? No

American school for the kids? No

Early upgrade for pilots junior to me if they bid the FDA? Maybe?

I just don't see ANYTHING good in this offer. I'm really disappointed in the NC and the company. I don't buy DW's statement that some money is better than no money. I say let the "train leave without us this time." Maybe the next one will be an "EXPRESS" instead of the freight train we are on now.
MaydayMark is offline  
Old 06-29-2007, 04:14 AM
  #23  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: unskilled laborer
Posts: 353
Default

I think that looking at this LOA from a "selfish" perspective is a good idea for all of us. I do not mean "selfish" in a negative sense. We are unionized so that the power of the group can attain more than 4500 individuals.

From a "selfish" perspective, none of us are better off voting for an LOA that we agree is below our worth. We are really just picking ourselves off little by little rather than all at once.

Crappy LOA here - Crappy one there and next thing you know, the contract sucks! And nowhere in the LOA does it say these bases have to remain small. We have to fight the urge to believe that this will be just a small group of volunteers because you never know.
fdxflyer is offline  
Old 06-29-2007, 05:02 AM
  #24  
Gets Weekends Off
 
FoxHunter's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Position: Retired
Posts: 980
Default

Originally Posted by Micro View Post
The voting yes and hoping guys will not bid it is a pipe dream. If you think the LOA is unacceptable then just vote NO! Voting down the LOA has nothing to do with scope. Scope MAY come into the picture only if no one bids the flying but has nothing to do with the LOA. The company can open these FDA's with or without this LOA. My question is if the company could open these FDA's uder the current contract then why are they coming to us and offering more money in an LOA if they don't have to. Maybe the answer is that they don't want foreign nationals flying our freight (no RLA or only US laws for them) and/ or the service failures associated with contracted flying is unacceptable.

Voting NO and expecting the company to come back with a better offer is the real pipe dream. The company will now be abe to open HKG/CDG without any additional cost. You thought DPs went fast.. Looks like a great deal for the junior guy that wants that Captain vacancy. Remember how well the Postal LOA went?
FoxHunter is offline  
Old 06-29-2007, 05:16 AM
  #25  
Gets Weekends Off
 
JetJocF14's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: B-777 Captain
Posts: 943
Default

Originally Posted by av8torguy View Post
Would you vote for it if it were $3000, $4000 OR $10000. If it's just about the money, how will voting "No" make the company increase the amount? I'm pretty sure that the MEC or NC has no leverage to get your demands.

Unfortunately I predict that even if the amount was $1.00 the company will have no problem getting pilots to fill the FDA slots. We don't need to vote "No" on the LOA we need everyone to not bid the FDA.
What an idiot. I hope you like fish heads and rice in your chinese 200' square flat. Oh and your kids learning from the big RED book of knowledge......
JetJocF14 is offline  
Old 06-29-2007, 05:21 AM
  #26  
Gets Weekends Off
 
FlyByNite's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: Captain
Posts: 157
Default

Originally Posted by FoxHunter View Post
Voting NO and expecting the company to come back with a better offer is the real pipe dream. The company will now be abe to open HKG/CDG without any additional cost. You thought DPs went fast.. Looks like a great deal for the junior guy that wants that Captain vacancy. Remember how well the Postal LOA went?
I can't vote for this. If the company wanted to go ahead a open the FDA, why didn't they? IF we vote this down, will they...maybe. I'm not voting for this package that will represent a pay cut. In this case something is not better than nothing.

My negotiating committee takes dictation from management.
FlyByNite is offline  
Old 06-29-2007, 05:31 AM
  #27  
Gets Weekends Off
 
2cylinderdriver's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Posts: 732
Default

I was leaning to the side of voting yes, not sure yet, the main reason the total lack of support from our crewforce when given simple direct instructions (read DP's for example). I am still not convinced we will not get people to bid it with or without an LOA. I am not bidding an FDA, but a no Vote is the tougher vote. I think DW is correct and saying the "ramifications" of voting it down are unknown, and a large part of the unknown is the people sharing the bus ride into AOC with you. What will they do ???

I voted NO on the contract, mainly on work rules, I am not afraid to vote no. I surely hope we have the intestinal fortitude to back up our collective resolve. I will wait for my ballot to arrive. The total package is sub-par, but is our Unity strong enough to get what we deserve ? Mine is. Wear your lanyards, this is just as important as ever. Don't let the Company win by default.
2cylinderdriver is offline  
Old 06-29-2007, 06:18 AM
  #28  
On Reserve
 
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Posts: 14
Default

Originally Posted by JetJocF14 View Post
What an idiot. I hope you like fish heads and rice in your chinese 200' square flat. Oh and your kids learning from the big RED book of knowledge......
A well thought out, cogent argument F-14. Did you have to spell check that before posting?


Once again it appears that many here can rail on about the NC and MEC selling out, caving-in or being company stooges. All excellent observations predicated on the fact that this LOA doesn't have the good deal that Subic had, or its actually going to cost more to live in CDG/HKG than the company is willing to pay. Apparently the "Only People" that have to be responsible/accountable around here are the NC and MEC; no way could we expect the crew force to not bid the FDA! As a matter of fact the SIG better get its act together on these "Disputed Pairings", because they are next!

Nice rhetoric; The fact that is being overlooked in this LOA is;
That FDA's are now given "representational status" unlike Subic presently. I provide an excerpt from the Addendum A.

5. During the period of the CDG FDA and/or the HKG FDA assignment, the laws of the United States and the laws of the states within the United States shall at all times apply to the employment relationship between me and Federal Express. Neither the laws of France, China or Hong Kong nor the laws of any other country or territory shall apply to the employment relationship between Federal Express and me.

During the last 2 Contract Negotiations the status of Subic and how it would be treated if the pilot group entered into "self-help"was an extremely serious concern, the LOA now clearly answers this issue.

Final thought; If the company is going to have an ACP or has other "Management Personnel" assigned to these FDA's what do their "Structured Reimbursement" packages consist of? Why should a pilot who goes to one of these "Domiciles" have to take anything less than what these individuals are receiving, if in fact it is more than what is being offered? If this is actually happening then that is what we should be directing our MEC and NC to strive for.
av8torguy is offline  
Old 06-29-2007, 07:33 AM
  #29  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Micro's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Drinking from the fire hose
Posts: 305
Default

Originally Posted by 2cylinderdriver View Post
I was leaning to the side of voting yes, not sure yet, the main reason the total lack of support from our crewforce when given simple direct instructions (read DP's for example). I am still not convinced we will not get people to bid it with or without an LOA. I am not bidding an FDA, but a no Vote is the tougher vote. I think DW is correct and saying the "ramifications" of voting it down are unknown, and a large part of the unknown is the people sharing the bus ride into AOC with you. What will they do ???

I voted NO on the contract, mainly on work rules, I am not afraid to vote no. I surely hope we have the intestinal fortitude to back up our collective resolve. I will wait for my ballot to arrive. The total package is sub-par, but is our Unity strong enough to get what we deserve ? Mine is. Wear your lanyards, this is just as important as ever. Don't let the Company win by default.
I'm at the point of not worrying about my fellow pilots. If we vote this substandard LOA down (which we should!!) and the company opens the FDA's under the current contract, why should I care if some "idiot" bids and goes there. We need to look at this LOA on it's overall merits only. If you think it stinks vote NO. I will be voting NO!!!!!!!!!!!
Micro is offline  
Old 06-29-2007, 07:52 AM
  #30  
Gets Weekends Off
 
cma2407's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: Row well and live...
Posts: 494
Default

Originally Posted by Busboy View Post

By the way, don't you find it curious that the only MEC dissenter was the SFS block rep?
No!! That's because he's the one that actually LIVES overseas!!!! The problem here is that whether the LOA passes or not, if and when our guys start bidding these positions, it's too late to change when you get there, the harsh economic truth sets in, and the household goods are still on the boat.

Then those comparisons to the E-1 become real.
cma2407 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Laxrox43
Cargo
77
06-05-2008 08:28 AM
Beertini
Cargo
361
07-07-2007 12:56 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices