FDA without the LOA
07-19-2007, 10:57 PM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: Who knows...waiting for a bid
Posts: 379
Paddles,
As one of those junior guys who is definately in the hopper to get this STV thing, I am strongly against this. But I would like to say this, I remember DW coming to my new hire class during indoc and speaking about the union and how they were looking out for my future, my retirement, and my work rules before I got here. That this contract negotiations were there to protect me and my future. This LOA sets a precident to make it a part of the CBA. It sets us back in the way of junior manning and is something that should be corrected prior to signing, not when we go back to negotiations(like my block rep tried to justify to me). I can't see how any of us can look at the good of the whole pilot force, or for a new hire for that matter, and say this LOA(which will be a part of the cba) is going to protect their interest either. This LOA falls way short in so many areas, that coming from a fortune 500 company(in the tops for how long now...) we deserve and should demand better.
As someone with a wife and kids, I would like to take them over seas, but the provisions in this loa are so far substandard that would be impossible, and to get a stv....well I really don't want an STV for any length of time. I can handle getting inversed into SIBA, because I can come home for my days off, but 30 to 90 days away...yeah the O gram makes it sound like we are in the military, but we aren't even paying half of the housing allowance they get.
Vote no for me.
HJ
As one of those junior guys who is definately in the hopper to get this STV thing, I am strongly against this. But I would like to say this, I remember DW coming to my new hire class during indoc and speaking about the union and how they were looking out for my future, my retirement, and my work rules before I got here. That this contract negotiations were there to protect me and my future. This LOA sets a precident to make it a part of the CBA. It sets us back in the way of junior manning and is something that should be corrected prior to signing, not when we go back to negotiations(like my block rep tried to justify to me). I can't see how any of us can look at the good of the whole pilot force, or for a new hire for that matter, and say this LOA(which will be a part of the cba) is going to protect their interest either. This LOA falls way short in so many areas, that coming from a fortune 500 company(in the tops for how long now...) we deserve and should demand better.
As someone with a wife and kids, I would like to take them over seas, but the provisions in this loa are so far substandard that would be impossible, and to get a stv....well I really don't want an STV for any length of time. I can handle getting inversed into SIBA, because I can come home for my days off, but 30 to 90 days away...yeah the O gram makes it sound like we are in the military, but we aren't even paying half of the housing allowance they get.
Vote no for me.
HJ
07-20-2007, 04:03 AM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 318
Read this
Originally Posted by Paddles
I respectfully disagree that the company will not open a FDA without the LOA. I think it will open one regardless of how we vote. The new business is there, the company wants their foot in the door and they will not wait for us. While I think the company would prefer we do the flying, I don’t think it is a requirement. Block 6 and 11 have new updates on the ALPA/FDX site and they are both well written. They put to bed some of the incorrect assumptions and bad gouge that have been written about on the several different LOA threads. I realize that this LOA is not all it could be and is not everything to all people. However, I do think it is reasonable under the circumstances. As a fairly junior guy (seniority ~ 3000 +/-), I also still think the Negotiation Committee has our best interest at heart and am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. Read the new updates and think hard about flying here 10 years down the road (I’ll still be under 60).
Block 11 rep said a lot when he closed with “There is a lot of rhetoric against this LOA. I believe some who advocate voting it down will never bid these FDA’s. However, rejecting the LOA will only mean that the people who do bid the FDA will have less. More importantly, FedEx pilots need to do the flying and all of our future growth is in the International arena.”
Still on the fence, but leaning YES
Chaff....Flares
Block 11 rep said a lot when he closed with “There is a lot of rhetoric against this LOA. I believe some who advocate voting it down will never bid these FDA’s. However, rejecting the LOA will only mean that the people who do bid the FDA will have less. More importantly, FedEx pilots need to do the flying and all of our future growth is in the International arena.”
Still on the fence, but leaning YES
Chaff....Flares
I know this is a little scary, and I respect your right to vote how you wish----BUT.....This LOA will effect us for years to come and it will be very hard to fix. Read my ealier blurb from the Subic dude (I've highlighted the portion below that applies to this thread). I recommend you vote NO now so we don't have to fix this later. Let's fix it NOW!
Jolly
From Subic Dude:
What if it gets turned down?
While most pilots I know are planning to vote NO on this LOA, a few pilots voting for it have expressed concern of ‘what if it gets turned down?’
1. To my knowledge, there has not been a single offer from management that hasn’t improved after the crewforce opposed it. When the original Subic domicile opened in 1995, not enough pilots bid the new location. The company offered a larger signing bonus, and got the pilots they needed. We’ve turned down two TAs and two “3%” offers. All four times we showed some resolve to management and gave our negotiating committee some needed clout to work a better deal.
2. The company can’t do it without our help. While our flying (according to our MEC during our current CBA road shows) is protected legally by our scope agreements, our biggest protection is the good job we do each and every night. When routes are flown by non-fedex pilots, our reliability drops to unsatisfactory levels. Remember, if the freight doesn’t get there on time, it’s free. Also, if the company felt that they could fly our routes with other pilots, they would have done it by now.
3. So if the LOA is turned down, we might have to work under the current CBA provisions? SFS is currently working under the current FDA provisions, and I have not met any SFS pilot who would rather work under this LOA.
Conclusion
This LOA will affect all of us for years to come, and a substandard deal serves no one in our crewforce. Once again, the company is trying to save millions on the back of the pilots, and broker an LOA that not only serves them in the FDA, but cripples our ability to pressure negotiations in 2010. Please vote NO and empower our negotiating committee to work a fairer FDA agreement.
07-20-2007, 04:46 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Gear Monkey
Posts: 3,193
Originally Posted by MaxKts
.....I am not advocating a no vote to make a statement. I am advocating a no vote to send the MEC back in with some backing and to fix what is lacking in this LOA.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
