More than just saying NO
07-12-2007, 05:37 PM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: 767 captain
Posts: 2,696
ps- the reality of it is that our managers could probably have a displacement bid if they wanted (move planes from SDF to overseas) and our guys would have to go until there were openings to come back. It is just like what we see in ANC. Luckily we are expanding and they are able to make new hires go up there in the FO seats, as well as junior guys wanting the captain upgrade. Many more senior MD-11 types have lost their captaincies rather than be forced to move. Could FedEx not displace the bottom guys from MEM to CDG if they chose?
07-12-2007, 06:00 PM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 356
Originally Posted by 767pilot
I agree and hope that your guys can make that argument. It will go a lot further than complaining about the size of your flat on the Champs d' Elysse which is what I am hearing a lot of here.
07-12-2007, 06:21 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: 767 captain
Posts: 2,696
Then take it to a private forum.
Take another look and see the complaints about the cost of living. Perhaps not the most, but they are sure out there beginning with the guy that posted craigs list links for Paris and compared how his friends were living in HKG.
We all have some level of a dog in this fight. Next time instead of your union rep standing there and telling you about what happened over at UPS, it is going to be our union rep telling us about what happened at FDX.
Take another look and see the complaints about the cost of living. Perhaps not the most, but they are sure out there beginning with the guy that posted craigs list links for Paris and compared how his friends were living in HKG.
We all have some level of a dog in this fight. Next time instead of your union rep standing there and telling you about what happened over at UPS, it is going to be our union rep telling us about what happened at FDX.
07-12-2007, 06:27 PM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Posts: 478
Originally Posted by hamfisted
The most talked about shortfall of this LOA is forced deployments for 90 days.
But STV does not affect those who would actually bid the FDA's. STV is the red herring in this whole thing. It will be the issue that gets the company these FDAs at such a low cost, they will be laughing at us for years to come! Watch this thing get voted down, the company throws a few more pennies at us and reduces the STV to say...oh, 45 days, and whammo, 95% vote yes for a slightly polished turd. Or worse yet, it gets voted IN and all of this goes as-is. Scary.
