LEC 99 Update
07-24-2007, 11:46 PM
#61
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Posts: 478
Originally Posted by fdx727pilot
I'm pretty sure DW said at the Germantown roadshow that he had been to CAN and HKG.
07-25-2007, 11:39 PM
#63
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 118
The ride to Guangzhou is, according to our HKG hotel desk staff, more like 5+ hours, maybe less in the early-morning hours, and worse at night, when the roads are clogged with trucks. So our "fact-finding tour" by union people, and their 3-hr. estimate, was based on what ... eye-balling a map and figuring 60 MPH, like I-95 goes through there or something? That's about 6 hours' travel prior to show time. The FAA would have a field day with that, don't you think? Any an arbitrator sure would have something to say about the low-ball housing allowance, since "similar class and craft" expats (ie, Cathay pilots get so much more ... US $5K to buy, $6.6K for an FO's rent, $8.2K for a Capt., and $3K for anyone who lives anywhere else. Why should we get any less than they do? And if you say it's because our larger paycheck makes up the difference, then you're saying the suit trash with the big expat paycheck and move package must be paying ALL his own rent -- and we know for sure that that isn't true. We're getting screwed on this LOA, and I urge you all to vote NO. We deserve better.
07-26-2007, 01:21 AM
#64
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 178
Originally Posted by HerkyBird
Why should we get any less than they do? And if you say it's because our larger paycheck makes up the difference, then you're saying the suit trash with the big expat paycheck and move package must be paying ALL his own rent -- and we know for sure that that isn't true. We're getting screwed on this LOA, and I urge you all to vote NO. We deserve better.
07-26-2007, 10:22 AM
#65
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,068
Originally Posted by HerkyBird
The ride to Guangzhou is, according to our HKG hotel desk staff, more like 5+ hours, maybe less in the early-morning hours, and worse at night, when the roads are clogged with trucks. So our "fact-finding tour" by union people, and their 3-hr. estimate, was based on what ... eye-balling a map and figuring 60 MPH, like I-95 goes through there or something? That's about 6 hours' travel prior to show time. The FAA would have a field day with that, don't you think?
Good info, but I doubt that both the company and the union aren't aware of this already. As you know the LOA removes the surface transportation restrictions in 8.B.1. We have all focused on the purported 3hr ride being the reason, because it's what stands out and that is what our union and company leadership have told us is the reason. It's all just part of the 'luxury' of living in HKG v. CAN. What has always bugged me about this portion of the LOA however is that the SIG already had the ability to approve this longer transportation via 8.B.1.b in the current deal, so why put it in the LOA. They haven't said it lately, b/c the focus has been on putting out fires over STV and housing/schooling costs, but when they did talk about it they said it was to ensure that we got paid for the transportation. That still didn't make sense, b/c the we get paid .5CH per hour of surface transportation up to a max of 2.5CH per deadhead. A three hour trip to CAN would give 1.5 hours of pay one way, 3CH round trip which is no where near the 2.5 pay limitation. Your info from the hotel in HKG makes it clear though that at least the NC and the company knew that it would take longer than 3 hours and thus the negotiation to remove the max credit hour restriction to ensure that proper pay credit. The FAA isn't a problem as the travel isn't local in nature(FAR definition) and therefore will be considered duty to them, and it's already covered by the hours of service portion of current agreement. It just means that RSV will be week long hotel stretches that won't be easy to move with likely travel days on each end and that the trips will probably be short on the first day or involve a DH out of HKG. I don't have an issue with the drive as long as we get paid for. I don't have an issue with the company not telling us the truth about the ride, the pairings will. What I do have an issue with is my union leaving out the specifics on this portion. I personally don't think it affects this LOA much, but that is my opinion only not everyone else and I don't think my leadership should be making decisions on which info to talk about and which not to. Give the pilots all the info and let them decide themselves what it means to them.
07-26-2007, 01:39 PM
#66
Slainge Var'
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Zeppelin Tail Gunner
Posts: 1,530
Originally Posted by MrSuupafly
We should not get a dime less than they do. According to APC, max Captain pay at Cathay (HKG based) is $17,440. Isn't that more than max Captain pay is here in a 4 week bid month? Stop drinking the Kool-Aid and VOTE NO.
07-26-2007, 02:26 PM
#67
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: 777 CAP
Posts: 494
Originally Posted by RedeyeAV8r
Tax equalization was/ is NOT to be a Monetary Benefit for Gain but rather a benefit to minimize TAX burdens to expats. In other words one should not be expecting to MAKE MORE.
Simply put, TAX equalization pays the difference in Taxes both to the US and Foreign governments on your "Taxable income" over what you would pay the US government as if you still lived in the US.
With the Tax equalization, one will not further benefit from the first $82,500 as that will be incorporated.
The money that the company pays both governments on your behalf taxes, will also be taxed as income
To simplify it (if that is possible with tax issues), if you Normal US TAX is $25,000 and your foreign Taxes obligations are an additional $15,000 USD, the accountants will figure your gross income with all benefits and see what you would have paid as a resident of the US and any additional tax burden to other goverments will be paid by the company.
In the example above the company would pay 15,000 to the French or HKG government on your behalf, but that 15,000 they pay will be figured into your gorss w-2 for tax purposes. So you will be paying taxes on the Taxes FedEX paid on your behalf.............Simple??
So pilots should not expect to "Make out on taxes", they just won't have to bear the Buren of paying additional foreign taxes.
Also you should check with you individual States because each state handles EXPAT taxes differently. SOme States forgoe any state taxes to Expats, others will still tax you as if you still reside there.
Good bad or indifferent,
The
Simply put, TAX equalization pays the difference in Taxes both to the US and Foreign governments on your "Taxable income" over what you would pay the US government as if you still lived in the US.
With the Tax equalization, one will not further benefit from the first $82,500 as that will be incorporated.
The money that the company pays both governments on your behalf taxes, will also be taxed as income
To simplify it (if that is possible with tax issues), if you Normal US TAX is $25,000 and your foreign Taxes obligations are an additional $15,000 USD, the accountants will figure your gross income with all benefits and see what you would have paid as a resident of the US and any additional tax burden to other goverments will be paid by the company.
In the example above the company would pay 15,000 to the French or HKG government on your behalf, but that 15,000 they pay will be figured into your gorss w-2 for tax purposes. So you will be paying taxes on the Taxes FedEX paid on your behalf.............Simple??
So pilots should not expect to "Make out on taxes", they just won't have to bear the Buren of paying additional foreign taxes.
Also you should check with you individual States because each state handles EXPAT taxes differently. SOme States forgoe any state taxes to Expats, others will still tax you as if you still reside there.
Good bad or indifferent,
The
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
