LOA predictions?
 

I've heard some numbers thrown around recently concerning the LOA...predictions about what the Yes/No vote is looking like. Has anybody been solicited by the union as part of an official poll or does anyone know of one being given?:confused:

Obviously if ACP's are lurking these halls, it's not going to be a landslide victory like our Contract was (not because of its merits by the way).

The more senior captains I talk too, the more oblivios I see that they are. They are still in the the "my union speaks for me" mindset, and are not reading what they are putting out.

I think it is going to pass because of this, and the laziness of the crew force to actually read the LOA and figure out just how it will impact the "entire" crew force, not just those who desire to go abroad.

HJ

During my recent Asia trip, everyone indicated they were voting against it because the compensation is way under par, no education benefit, terrible move package, and STV.

On the other hand, I know a few who are voting yes because they won't bid it anyway and feel they're too senior to have STV impact them.

The vast majority however, are saying a big NO.

My biggest fear is that it just squeeks by; 50.01% vote "YES" because it most likely won't affect them. As I mentioned before, I have already heard numbers thrown around and was wondering if there was any validity to them. Most likely not, as they seemed pretty extreme.

My biggest hope is it squeeks by 50.01% vote and nobody, and I mean nobody bids it. See how long FDAs last when you have to resort to STV for your entire manning and how successful they are with continual turnover and pilots with no desire to be there. Imagine the Captain or F/O who flys the MEM-ATL flight every month, getting shipped to China. His frist question will be what are meters? You need pilots at the FDAs that are willing to stay for the FDAs to be successful. For those in the military, imagine running an AOR when units deploy every 30 or even 90 days in and out. Every ninety days you lose all your experience.

Remember, they have had problem filling SFS in the past, and that is a financial windfall for pilots (Houses w/ maids, cooks, and gardners, 80K tax free, 50 cent beers, etc). Imagine trying to sell HKG. Cost of Living doubles or triples to what you were used to, SARS, three hour taxi rides to and from work (w/ immigration in between each), etc. Should be an easy sell, especially with the LOA in place.

On top of that - imagine asking the Sheraton to pony up about 50 extra rooms for 3 months at a time - at the discount rate!

I would guess there will be no lack of captain bidders, and so STV's would be at a minimum. FO's on the other hand... That will be ugly.

59% will favor.

41% will oppose.

70% will vote.

For god's sakes, I hope Lippy will be dead wrong.

Please reverse those numbers...

70% Vote! This is an LOA, not a contract, I'll be happy if over 2500 vote! And if all the naysayers spread the word about how bad this LOA really is then it won't pass. There are to many short comings, like in EVERY SECTION.

The company knows it only needs a couple dozen guys in each seat to fill these spots and the LOA specifically targets a certain demographic pilot...the young single and older empty nesters. Those are the ONLY ones that can actually make this kind of move or bid either FDA.

BUT, don't think this LOA doesn't effect EVERYONE on property. It might not right now but sooner or later, somewhere down the road it will be a player in your career. So if we are going to do this lets do it right from the get go and not have to worry about it later on.

I'm still voting NO until at LEAST an average COLA is paid and SVT is completely removed!

Hopefully the guys who are too lazy to actually read the LOA are also too lazy to vote.

Dissenting Opinion
 

Guys,

When is E.I.'s opinion coming out? Been waitin' for ever for this, but no word yet. Anybody know?

Who can make a 500lb move? My overnight bag was 41 lbs when I checked it the other day. I would like to think I could bring more than 12 times that much for a couple of years!! How could anyone vote yes when somebody intentionally insults them like that?

I might have missed it. But, I'm still waiting on the "Lessons Learned" email we were promised from last negotiations. I personally think that management and/or the union leadership do not want it shared how truly effective it was last Jun/Jul when guys started posting(on this site) the trip details every time they were offered a draft trip. I think it truly kept the wh0res and check guys from sneaking around and flying these lines without repurcussions.

Perhaps, if the union aknowledges what is specifically written on a public message board, they open themselves up to future litigation and responsibility for posts on that message board? What do ya think?

I'm with Lippy. I think he is probably spot on. Which sucks by the way.

Last Capt I talked to said if the MEC said yes then he was just going to vote yes. When I asked him about STV, he did not even know what it was and asked me if I was sure that was in the final LOA proposal. Like I saw a preliminary one?

His ignorance amazed me. I guess I have to give him some credit to be willing to vote, even if he is going to rubber stamp the MEC without even reading the LOA and actually thinking what he is voting on.

Then you better start stuffing mailboxes, because you're only getting to about 150 here.

Well, sort of. I read the stuff here and it gives me more to talk about in the crewroom. Often, I find people who say they read this stuff but never post.

Add My Vote
 

I'm a frequent reader, first time contributor. . .I'll vote NO. And I spread the word.

Can we hand out hand bills at work?

This whole LOA stinks and is way short in most areas. It's time for the company to step up to the plate and make an LOA we can live with. It's all about the money and this company can afford to do the right thing for this pilot group. How can I vote yes on this when FO's will be living on food stamps ?
Big NO here.

When is the official vote?

7/23 - 8/10

Ok, I was off by 98. Go to the poll http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/sh...ad.php?t=14057 248 people have voted. If you were running a company we call that weak market penetration. Box stuffing is the only way. Now we'll see who really backs up their rantings, when you have to dig down into your pocket and get 4500 copies of your manifesto out, and nobody to help you stuff.

I second and third that hope!!!!!!!!

53% voting
55% vote yes because svt won't happen to them or they don't know what it is

I can stuff the lockers in ANC but think we should have a standardized message. Has anyone already developed a flyer? If so, PM me.

I'm voting against it. Even though I don't know what "svt" is, either.

I do know what STV is, though. But, that is not why I'm voting against it. I'm voting against it because the LOA is so pitiful in most of the other areas that STV may actually have to be used.

We should be voting against it for that reason. Not STV itself.

IMHO

Hmmm .. NMB (Non-Member-Bob) writes some of the best manifesto's I 've seen. I seldom agree with him but maybe we could solicit his help for a good cause (for a change). How 'bout it Bob? How about taking up this cause for the benefit of your fellow pilots?


Mark

PS ... TonyC has the second best manifestos and I almost always agree with him.

Problem is, I have chosen to ignore Bob, so if I got a flyer from him, I would just trash it without reading it.......

Problem is, now his opinion counts, and he voted yes.:(

...on his second day on the job. Tony and I disagree here and there...but cut him a bit of slack.

I think these guys just "blew it" on the SVT and didn't see the ramifications as they were excited about new jets, new domiciles, and getting Hong Kong instead of CAN. I'm not here to defend the NC...I think they made some errors but I WASN'T THERE. In the euphoria over moving the domicile from CAN to HKG, they missed the fact that if it didn't go senior we just handed someone the chance to send us abroad for 90 days (albeit during opening/closing of the domicle, etc etc).

The pay package can be fought over. Its the STV that makes this "no go" fo me. Everyone knows how I feel on the STVs...

However--I don't think all of this is in Tony's lap. I've asked him to can DW, revoke the age 60 support, and a host of other things...and he (amazingly enough) hasn't bent to my will. :D However--he's a good guy who got thrown into the fire pretty quick. I wouldn't judge the block 5 rep by this LOA. Give him a little while to make his mark. (I'm waiting for him to get inversed off the left seat of the -10 into a 727 to requery his thoughts on retro :p)

Nice thing about this whole LOA is at least we get a vote. Voting no may or may notl send a message to your company, but it will send a message to your MEC.

"I think these guys just "blew it" on the SVT and didn't see the ramifications as they were excited about new jets, new domiciles, and getting Hong Kong instead of CAN. I'm not here to defend the NC...I think they made some errors but I WASN'T THERE. In the euphoria over moving the domicile from CAN to HKG, they missed the fact that if it didn't go senior we just handed someone the chance to send us abroad for 90 days (albeit during opening/closing of the domicle, etc etc)."

I would add that DW and the MEC may be excited about impressing ALPA National instead of doing what is right by their membership at FDX. The Age 60 change vote was one example and now getting perceived scope protection on international flying that no other ALPA carrier has been able to get is another. I was told by an MEC rep that one reason this was a good deal was that the ALPA National attorney's could not believe we got FedEx to agree to this. They were really impressed and saw it as precedent setting for future ALPA carrier negotiations. I don't think it is anything sinister, just a case of "Wow, if the ALPA lawyers like it, it must be good." I'm not sure this LOA with the substandard COLA's and forced STV's that our crew force will have to live with is worth any of that though.

Mayday,

I haven't much time to write at the moment but I have followed some of the discussion about this topic. In short, if the facts about the LOA are correct as presented on this site, I agree that the LOA is not in the best interest of the "junior" pilots. Moreover, its implemetation will continue our professional habit of weakening ourselves strategically by succumbing to standard divide and conquer tactics (routinely implemented by both union and management).

From what I see now, the best "box-stuffer" available is the "minority opinion" written by Mr. Irizarry (whom I have never met). Of particular strategic importance is his comment that "Our goal should be to negotiate an LOA that would provide a benefit for 4,800 pilots." Only by considering the interests of the entire group can this crewforce and profession be truly unified. Again, if the facts hold up as he has presented them, his document should be the focus of your attention. The only question now is how to market it credibly to the rest of the crewforce.

I have an appointment but will comment a bit more later. I do think this is an extremely important matter for all of us.

Bob

Albief, I don't agree that the pay package can be fought over. We either vote this up or down. The negotiations are OVER if this gets voted in. I agree that Tony has been thrown into the fire but if he's unwilling to oppose this LOA (does the majority of block 5 or the ones contacting him oppose it) and not can (DW if that's what the block wants) then he doesn't need to stay either. The MEC need to start representing the views of this pilot group.

Agree on all points. I'm just not knee-capping Tony yet... I think the guy hsa the potential to help the cause.

My "pay can be fought over..." point is moot. As long as their is the STV clause I'll be voting no.

As for MEC issues--I'm staying focused on the close rocks--this LOA. Other issues (all valid) can wait.

Man, that's rich.

NMB actually thought MM really cared what he thought.

Thanks for the laugh train wreck boy.

FJ

Non-Member?
 

Aren't you a NON-MEMBER????

If so, shut your hole!

Bob, While I would never try and stop your constitutional right to free speech and your right to post on this web, I can't fathom why you think anyone would care what you think about this LOA. You don't pay your way, you aren't a member of the union, and as such you don't get to vote! You talk about how we "continue our professional habit of weakening ourselves strategically by succumbing to standard divide and conquer tactics". Take a look in the mirror, it's you on the other side. Until you become a member and pay the dues, this LOA is only an important matter to us and you are just along for the ride with absolutely NO say on whether it's good, bad, passes or doesn't pass.

Man if this isn't a case of the eunuch telling the Sheik what to do with the harem...

Chris Farley voice -

Remember, remember when you called that guy "train wreck boy?"

That was awesome!