FDA nightmare for junior guys
07-01-2007, 03:40 PM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 177
FDA nightmare for junior guys
I am absolutly not in favor of this LOA but check out this scenario...
Since we're overmanned (currently fat in the 72, 10 is going away, SFS closing), here's the worst case scenario I can think of for junior F/O's (<3yrs?) with new FDA's openning:
If we turn down this LOA and the company puts the FDA's on the bid anyway the more senior F/O's (>3yrs) will bid Capt at FDA's. The rest not able to hold Capt and unwilling to bid FDA's as a F/O will try to remain stateside, but since we're overmanned some will get excessed out of their seat by more senior guys from the 10 and SFS, and have no place to go other than the FDA's. Now they are in limbo, since they can't be forced to a FDA. Or even worse, can they possibly be facing furlough since we're overmanned?
I hope we don't come to this, but is this scenario possible?
If it is possible, then maybe this POS LOA is better than having the junior folks face furlough?
Senior guys chime in here if I'm wrong.
Thanks,
SG
Since we're overmanned (currently fat in the 72, 10 is going away, SFS closing), here's the worst case scenario I can think of for junior F/O's (<3yrs?) with new FDA's openning:
If we turn down this LOA and the company puts the FDA's on the bid anyway the more senior F/O's (>3yrs) will bid Capt at FDA's. The rest not able to hold Capt and unwilling to bid FDA's as a F/O will try to remain stateside, but since we're overmanned some will get excessed out of their seat by more senior guys from the 10 and SFS, and have no place to go other than the FDA's. Now they are in limbo, since they can't be forced to a FDA. Or even worse, can they possibly be facing furlough since we're overmanned?
I hope we don't come to this, but is this scenario possible?
If it is possible, then maybe this POS LOA is better than having the junior folks face furlough?
Senior guys chime in here if I'm wrong.
Thanks,
SG
07-01-2007, 03:47 PM
#2
On Reserve
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: 727 SO
Posts: 16
Read Sec 4.A.2.b of the CBA, "The minimum bid period guarantee shall be reduced to a minimum of 48/60CH before any pilot is furloughed. At least a full bid period must follow the announcement of this action. This provision shall only be used to prevent or delay a furlough."
07-01-2007, 03:47 PM
#3
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 62
Originally Posted by Some guy
I am absolutly not in favor of this LOA but check out this scenario...
Since we're overmanned (currently fat in the 72, 10 is going away, SFS closing), here's the worst case scenario I can think of for junior F/O's (<3yrs?) with new FDA's openning:
If we turn down this LOA and the company puts the FDA's on the bid anyway the more senior F/O's (>3yrs) will bid Capt at FDA's. The rest not able to hold Capt and unwilling to bid FDA's as a F/O will try to remain stateside, but since we're overmanned some will get excessed out of their seat by more senior guys from the 10 and SFS, and have no place to go other than the FDA's. Now they are in limbo, since they can't be forced to a FDA. Or even worse, can they possibly be facing furlough since we're overmanned?
I hope we don't come to this, but is this scenario possible?
If it is possible, then maybe this POS LOA is better than having the junior folks face furlough?
Senior guys chime in here if I'm wrong.
Thanks,
SG
Since we're overmanned (currently fat in the 72, 10 is going away, SFS closing), here's the worst case scenario I can think of for junior F/O's (<3yrs?) with new FDA's openning:
If we turn down this LOA and the company puts the FDA's on the bid anyway the more senior F/O's (>3yrs) will bid Capt at FDA's. The rest not able to hold Capt and unwilling to bid FDA's as a F/O will try to remain stateside, but since we're overmanned some will get excessed out of their seat by more senior guys from the 10 and SFS, and have no place to go other than the FDA's. Now they are in limbo, since they can't be forced to a FDA. Or even worse, can they possibly be facing furlough since we're overmanned?
I hope we don't come to this, but is this scenario possible?
If it is possible, then maybe this POS LOA is better than having the junior folks face furlough?
Senior guys chime in here if I'm wrong.
Thanks,
SG
I don't question your concerns nor do I pretend to know what is possible. I just don't like the mindset that a bad LOA is better than no LOA. That is just the very mindset of our weak MEC. Right now, I am as distrustful of our MEC as I am the company. I plan to vote NO.
I am also very interested in reading the view of the lone NO vote from the SPS Representative. He is probably the only one on the MEC who has recently lived outside the U.S. (or Shelby County). We deserve a better LOA.
Last edited by RockyTopFlyer; 07-01-2007 at 04:07 PM. Reason: addition
07-01-2007, 06:57 PM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 177
Like I said, I don't support the proposed LOA either and now that Gonzo has pointed out that furlough is not an immediate option, I'm less paranoid about losing my job. However, I'm still curious with what happens to the "excessed" pilots. Do they stay in their present seat at the bottom of the list until they can bid out?
SG
SG
07-01-2007, 09:35 PM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,068
Hope it doesn't come down to it but...........
As long as we're overmanned Some Guy is on the right track, except that I doubt it will get to an actual furlough. Perhaps a threat of one like UPS to get things rolling. The only people that count(the company) feel we are overmanned and don't see it change before Summer '08 and that doesn't include age 65 ramifications or a stagnant US economy that is sure to flounder ahead of next years election. I just don't see the company agreeing to hire when they already have the pilots on property to do what they want satisfying their overstaffing problems along with their insurance issues.
Experienced unionists will tell you that a contract ain't a contract until it survives the grievance process. The company could notify ALPA it intends to furlough but that triggers all of that nasty contract language, so they will go the simpler route and excess the people into FDA awards and force ALPA to grieve it. This is where it gets fun. ALPA has two choices: fight the grievance or make a deal. They will weigh the financial impact to the company and thus future pilot $$$, contract integrity/legitimacy(grievences),the desire of both FDX ALPA and National to get US pilots in those jobs vs. giving a poop job to some junior pilots. You know what will win and there will be no vote on it.
The only question is how will ALPA sell it to us? Will they take the passover pay tactic and say that the grievance could not be won because the company had presented a strong case to the arbitrator that we were overstaffed and that our request for newhires was unreasonable? Will they say that the company notified the association of their intent to furlough and that it was their duty to do what's best for us a make a deal as anything else would not be properly representing the pilots? Who knows? There are so many ways and people who are far more creative than I.
And if this goes down, you can count on us to fall in line and say that it's all just part of being junior. We love to eat our young, it's part of this business like the ribbing that poolie is getting on the other thread. I can hear the Captains now telling people how lucky they are to get shipped and how many people wish that that they were in that position. I bet someone has that exact response to this post.
Experienced unionists will tell you that a contract ain't a contract until it survives the grievance process. The company could notify ALPA it intends to furlough but that triggers all of that nasty contract language, so they will go the simpler route and excess the people into FDA awards and force ALPA to grieve it. This is where it gets fun. ALPA has two choices: fight the grievance or make a deal. They will weigh the financial impact to the company and thus future pilot $$$, contract integrity/legitimacy(grievences),the desire of both FDX ALPA and National to get US pilots in those jobs vs. giving a poop job to some junior pilots. You know what will win and there will be no vote on it.
The only question is how will ALPA sell it to us? Will they take the passover pay tactic and say that the grievance could not be won because the company had presented a strong case to the arbitrator that we were overstaffed and that our request for newhires was unreasonable? Will they say that the company notified the association of their intent to furlough and that it was their duty to do what's best for us a make a deal as anything else would not be properly representing the pilots? Who knows? There are so many ways and people who are far more creative than I.
And if this goes down, you can count on us to fall in line and say that it's all just part of being junior. We love to eat our young, it's part of this business like the ribbing that poolie is getting on the other thread. I can hear the Captains now telling people how lucky they are to get shipped and how many people wish that that they were in that position. I bet someone has that exact response to this post.
07-01-2007, 09:46 PM
#6
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: MD-11
Posts: 66
This last post makes me ask the question - did the company overhire on purpose? It would make sense if they had a long term 'Doctor Evil' plan to affect Scope. If you believe the future of FEDEX is in China then we really have to think this one out. I am sure the company is several steps ahead in this Chess game.
07-01-2007, 10:04 PM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,068
I would agree RV-7 that the time to think this out is now. Limiting bad deals to a portion of junior people is the easiest way to get the camel's nose under the tent. Better to handle it right now vs. 10 years down the road when we have two or three big FDA's covering alot more pilots than our pea brains envisioned.
07-01-2007, 10:07 PM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 2,889
Nobody overhired. Age 60 changes are a watershed event. There was no guarantee last year or the year before that changes would occur (heck--there's no guarantee it will change NOW but it looks that way...)
Even our former pro-stans chair is moving the the sideways seat. I don't think he's hanging around because he misses the -10...but rather he (and a bunch more) think there is a very good chance they'll keep/get back their captain's seat. If they are right--we might be overmanned. If they aren't--I'd say the manning will change by about 200 numbers in 2 months as a bunch of former captains bail.
Love or hate the union, the furlough provisions in our CBA are pretty tight. No VLT/DRF and 48 hours BLG mean we gotta be waaaaaaay fat to worry about that. The 48 hour BLG also means those senior captain money chasers got a lot of money to lose if f-los ever occur, so I don't think anyone will want those chapters of the CBA to ever take affect. There is no such thing as a furlough proof job or airline, but I think its a very very very long stretch to equate telling them "no" on this LOA to worrying about job security.
Then again--if I am so smart--why am I pulling gear on jets after 10 oclock at night, right?
Even our former pro-stans chair is moving the the sideways seat. I don't think he's hanging around because he misses the -10...but rather he (and a bunch more) think there is a very good chance they'll keep/get back their captain's seat. If they are right--we might be overmanned. If they aren't--I'd say the manning will change by about 200 numbers in 2 months as a bunch of former captains bail.
Love or hate the union, the furlough provisions in our CBA are pretty tight. No VLT/DRF and 48 hours BLG mean we gotta be waaaaaaay fat to worry about that. The 48 hour BLG also means those senior captain money chasers got a lot of money to lose if f-los ever occur, so I don't think anyone will want those chapters of the CBA to ever take affect. There is no such thing as a furlough proof job or airline, but I think its a very very very long stretch to equate telling them "no" on this LOA to worrying about job security.
Then again--if I am so smart--why am I pulling gear on jets after 10 oclock at night, right?
07-01-2007, 10:12 PM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,068
Albie, what stops them from excessing people into FDA's and forcing ALPA to either grieve it or let it go? Furlough is the extreme tactic, but do you really think they will hire if they feel they already have enough pilots to do the job? Do you think this MEC would hold their feet to the fire on this or cut a deal?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
