Bueller is out sick.

If we vote no, then the company will have 18 months or so to decide whatever reason they "offered" us this LOA is still valid. If yes they will make the pot better. If not we aren't stuck with the SVT give back.

If we vote yes, this will become a part of the CBA and the basis of our next contract. Anything we want to fix will have to be paid for.

Thanks for the starting the thread. But I differ in what I believe are the indisputable facts.

I believe we are trading 3 month SVT (instead of 1 month SIBA) for a guaranteed amount of rent in a signed LOA and the 10K for staying there.

Does anyone really believe the company would expect anyone to bid for HKG or CDG without rent money? They will give folks rent money to go there or no one will bid it. And the amount in the LOA is so low I think it would be the same if we vote down the LOA.

They will also give newhires rent money. Otherwise newhires will be VERY hard to come by and some will leave during the probationary year. That would leave a mark.

We may loose the 10K "bonus" that may not have come without an LOA. So what. I say flushing the 3 month SVT option is work 10K.

Well, while I'm voting no on this deal, I have to disagree with you on this point. I think the company could staff every FO seat and at least all the CDG Capt seats from off the street (Airbus 300/310 typed guys are harder to come by.) When we vote this down, the company will only come back with a better deal if the really want experienced FDX people in the seats. But a turd by any other name is still a turd, so I vote NO.

Correct me if I am wrong but don't we have week at a time of SIBA now, much better then month at a time.

We get the 10K bonus or 79CH NOW but some will lose it if this is voted in:

Pilots who choose the existing CBA option shall be entitled to the following:
a. Relocation benefits as described in Section 6 of the basic Agreement, except that Section 6.E.1.e. (FDA Bonus) shall be inapplicable.

Same with Tax Equalization. Can anyone from the MEC tell me if Foreign Tax Gross Up (In current CBA) is better or worse then Tax Equalization. If not how could you vote for this LOA?

The company negotiators are probably still laughing.

You bet.

My MD11 CA bud is busy trying to convince folks how we need this LOA so we can negotiate the benefits up in the next contract.

All I can say is WOW! They are talking in their upper echelon circles without knowledge of what is being traded for what. Maybe they know and are just thankful they aren't Airbus guys.

Nothing is worth the SVT part of the company's offer. They could make the LOA less of a bitter pill by using the current SIBA rules if they have to inverse people into a FDA. That way what people want to move can with a package and if not crew members would not be forced to move to another country. It's simple for me if SVT is part of any LOA then NO!!!!

[Folks, forgive this duplicate posting; we're trying to get the right info and a sense of perspective out to as many of you as possible. I'm putting this on a few threads where it seems appropriate. Thanks ...]

<< I know someone living in HKG and they told me the Stanley area is one of the highest COL areas in HKG. Not discounting what you're saying but I think there are other areas that may be more reasonable. >>

Well, Germantown is one of the most expensive places to live in MEM, and plenty of FDX pilots think that's what they deserve. We're not even asking to meet that standard of living. But how many of you MEM-based pilots would even CONSIDER living in Whitehaven, where the rents are so much more affordable? NOT ONE OF YOU is willing to live with the po' folks near Graceland, but you seem to think the SFS folks must be gettin' uppity to want a decent standard of living for ourselves. Think of it in those terms. Just because AN apartment CAN be found for what the company wants to pay doesn't mean it's any kind of place you'd consider living or bringing a wife and family. You're not willing to live in a $250/mo. apartment in MEM (and for good reasons), so there's no reason we should live in equivalent squalor. Just because you might be able to see the water from your window doesn't mean it's the kind of place where visiting Hollywood stars would like to hang out.

The same way we got them to the table in the first place.

Maybe, remind them that, without their LOA, our European crews will be working under French labor laws and may strike as they please(basically).

I submit that accepting the first offer in any negotiations doesn't bode well. Nor does acting in fear of what the company may do.

Given the options in the LOA, sure seems like the company doesn't want to pay shipping costs over to either domicile.
If we vote No, then it will be up to the company to determine its actions. They will either up the offer, and they have already stated they want the LOA done prior to any bid.
If they don't, then its up to each pilot to determine whether they want to bid the FDA's or not.
If only a few people vote for it, do you really think the finance department is going to approve hiring enough people (and pay benefits accordingly) to fill those domiciles with flying that had formerly been done by existing employees.

As an example of the foolishness of bean counters, when I was an SO, I picked up the occasional X pairing that replaced an SO on day 3 of a trip versus paying him draft for the whole 5 days....downside is that since he was a newhire, even at draft his payrate was below mine.

While I don't know what will occur, I am willing to vote NO and find out.
I would rather fix it now, than expend negotiating capital later trying to "fix" it.

Folks -- The following is an email response from one FDX pilot who had been asked about the cost-of-living situation when he lived in HKG prior to joining FDX. Because the writer is rather junior, he's reticent about speaking up. I'm respecting his wish to stay below the ridge-line by not using his name. Please forgive me if you see this post on a couple more threads -- this info is critical, and should be seen by as many pilots as possible.

Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 19:07:58 -0700
>Hi Mike,
>
>Thanks for the info. I couldn't agree more.
>
>My wife and I lived in Hong Kong in a previous life in the mid 90's. I was with [a major brokerage house] and our housing at that time was about US$9,000 per month for an apartment in Repulse Bay. It was about 2,300 square feet and pretty nice, but in a older building, on a lower floor, with wall unit A/C that barely kept it cool. I would think that same apartment is much more now. I had one of the lower housing allowances for expats -- as I recall, some other guys were getting up to twice that amount.
>
>[The brokerage firm] paid for housing, and a lot more, too. They covered schooling, family trips home to the states, all moving expenses, medical/dental, storage for stuff we left in the States, and probably a lot more that I've forgotten.
>
>The other thing people need to remember is how quickly the real estate market changes in Hong Kong. It goes up and down very quickly. I read that right now it is going up at about 20% per year. That happened to us -- by the time we arrived in Hong Kong, the housing allowance we had agreed to was way behind where the market was. Fortunately, the company eventually agreed to raise the number.
>
>I have been following the rumors/announcements on this issue, since we would really like to have the chance to get overseas while our kids are still young. I was going to email Dave Webb, but after seeing the response to that other guy who is even senior to me, I'm not so sure.
>
>Enjoy the rest of your vacation.
>
>Cheers,
> [name withheld by Herkybird]