Who will bid FDA with no LOA?
07-27-2007, 01:54 PM
#41
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: FDX A300 CPT
Posts: 967
Originally Posted by Albief15
In fact, its a huge plus for the CDG crowd but a major concession for guys in HKG. I missed that point until this week. I appreciate FDX taking care of the bros taxes in France--that's good. I think using the bro's money from HKG to fund it is...well...wrong. We are talking about 25k or so of savings if you can keep your expat deduction. That alone would help fund those school or apartment costs..
07-27-2007, 02:21 PM
#42
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Gear Monkey
Posts: 3,191
Originally Posted by Albief15
DLAX,
I would really, really, really like to help our company AND support the union. I want us to do this flying and be the dominent force for years to come.
But no--I'm not changing my vote as things stand.....
..... I just haven't seen anything that makes me think I need to change my vote.
But there are still two weeks--and we already made one change. Perhaps there's hope that the company and union will realize there probably isn't going to be an LOA if we cannot improve it. Maybe they can make some changes...
Then again--maybe this thing will sail through anyway. I tend to doubt it.
I would really, really, really like to help our company AND support the union. I want us to do this flying and be the dominent force for years to come.
But no--I'm not changing my vote as things stand.....
..... I just haven't seen anything that makes me think I need to change my vote.
But there are still two weeks--and we already made one change. Perhaps there's hope that the company and union will realize there probably isn't going to be an LOA if we cannot improve it. Maybe they can make some changes...
Then again--maybe this thing will sail through anyway. I tend to doubt it.
A agree 100% that I want the LOA to help the company expand and grow, support the union and lock up the flying for our pilots --- but I have to ask myself if voting "yes" for this particular version of a FDA LOA is the best "long term" move to reach those goals.
What's most discouraging to me is the MECs view (or relationship with the company negogiators) that this is it --- take it or leave it --- no changes --- no second chance.
I am thoroughly convinced there is "middle ground" that can bring this LOA up to a silver or bronze std that we can truly grow in the future --- but much more needs to be fixed then the STV portions.
07-27-2007, 02:32 PM
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: 777 Capt
Posts: 403
Quote from Albie, "The current LOA wipes out a lot of our trip/duty rigs we fought so hard for last contract."
Prezbear's response, "That's not true. Just understand that we will be scheduled to domestic parameters. While I can't even stand to ride the one hour (occasionally 1.5)from PVG (Pudong airport) to the hotel in Shanghai, the tradeoff in the LOA for the ground transportation allows us to live in Hong Kong. This is MUCH preferable to Guangzhou. Additionally, depending on how the ground transportation is used, it might help to increase your days off."
Prezbear, signing off on this LOA with its STV provision (even the 30 day one) is a HUGE concession in work rules. Let me give you an example why. (Caution! Extensive math use coming).
Currently, if I am sent on a 13 day trip, I will be paid one hour of pay for every 4 hours that I am away from home (trip rig). 13 day trip x 6 hours of pay (78hrs) x ($148.48 as a 9 year wide body FO) = $11,581.44 plus,
13 x 6 x $7/hr International override = $546 plus,
13 x 24 x $2.70 International per diem = $842.40
Added up, that 13 day trip means $12,969.84 in income to me.
If I am STV'ed for even just 30 days, then I will be stuck over in Hong Kong for 17 additional days for just the 17 days worth of per diem, or $1101.60 additional pay. So I am stuck away from my family for 30 days for $14,071.44.
Under the work rules we will be giving up if this LOA passes, if the company wanted to keep me away from my family for the additional 17 days, they would have to draft me to do so. That means 17 days x 6 x $148.48 x 1.5 = $22,717.44. Add in the International override 17 x 6 x $7 = $714. Plus the $1101.60 per diem = $24,533.04 in total compensation that I should be paid under current work rules for the additional 17 days away, versus $1101.60 that I will be paid under the LOA.
Or, instead of the $37,502.88 that the company would have to pay me to keep me available to them in HKG for 30 days, they will be able to keep me at their beck-and-call for just $14,071.44. That means the company just saved $23,431.44 in compensation that should have to be paid to me under the current work rules.
Or, lets assume the company wont pay one guy that much draft, and instead will just pay straight pay to use four FO's to get the same 30 days of coverage in HKG. Why four? The company would have to spend a minimum of 3 days deadheading each FO over there, and 2 days back. That means that first and second FO's trips would consist of 8 days of duty plus 5 days of deadheading, or a 13 day trip. That leaves 14 days of coverage open, so two FO's would have to split that with each getting 7 days of duty, plus 5 days of deadheading. Or, two 12 day trips. Assuming each was also a 9-year FO, then the first and second FO's trips would be worth $12,969.84, and the third and fourth FO's would be worth $11,972.16.
Added together, the compensation required to get 30 days of coverage with four FO's, the total compensation the company would have to pay under the current work rules would be $49,884.
So, under the LOA (if it passes), the company will be able to keep me at their beck-and-call for 30 days in HKG for just $14,071.44, versus paying me $37,502.88, or paying four guys a total of $49,884.
Any way you cut it, the company saves between $23,000 and $35,000 on each and every FO of my seniority that they can STV.
That my friend, is a HUGE CONCESSION on our part, and a HUGE SAVINGS for the company. I can now understand why the company is excited about the large sums of money that can be made with the opening of these FDA's. Unfortuntely, a large chunk of the money is going to come out of our hides.
Let's not forget the deadhead money the company will be saving.
From the July bidpack.
MEM-LAX - NW - $458
LAX-HKG - CX - $3977
HKG-LAX - CX - $3760
LAX-MEM - NW - $463
Total = $8658
Add in the cost of ground transportation costs to the company, and the total cost to deadhead one pilot over to and back from HKG is approx. $9000.
Deadhead one FO with the STV - cost to the company (minus hotel cost which just about even out) = $14,071 + $9000 = approx. $23,071
Deadhead four FO's with our current work rules - cost to the company = $49,884 + ($9000 x 4 = $36,000) = $85,884.
Total savings to the company by using STV = $62,813!!!
We're going to give up this amount of money, and give the company this kind of savings all for some POSSIBLE scope improvements and an inadequate $2700 housing allowance? Uhhh, NO!
Prezbear's response, "That's not true. Just understand that we will be scheduled to domestic parameters. While I can't even stand to ride the one hour (occasionally 1.5)from PVG (Pudong airport) to the hotel in Shanghai, the tradeoff in the LOA for the ground transportation allows us to live in Hong Kong. This is MUCH preferable to Guangzhou. Additionally, depending on how the ground transportation is used, it might help to increase your days off."
Prezbear, signing off on this LOA with its STV provision (even the 30 day one) is a HUGE concession in work rules. Let me give you an example why. (Caution! Extensive math use coming).
Currently, if I am sent on a 13 day trip, I will be paid one hour of pay for every 4 hours that I am away from home (trip rig). 13 day trip x 6 hours of pay (78hrs) x ($148.48 as a 9 year wide body FO) = $11,581.44 plus,
13 x 6 x $7/hr International override = $546 plus,
13 x 24 x $2.70 International per diem = $842.40
Added up, that 13 day trip means $12,969.84 in income to me.
If I am STV'ed for even just 30 days, then I will be stuck over in Hong Kong for 17 additional days for just the 17 days worth of per diem, or $1101.60 additional pay. So I am stuck away from my family for 30 days for $14,071.44.
Under the work rules we will be giving up if this LOA passes, if the company wanted to keep me away from my family for the additional 17 days, they would have to draft me to do so. That means 17 days x 6 x $148.48 x 1.5 = $22,717.44. Add in the International override 17 x 6 x $7 = $714. Plus the $1101.60 per diem = $24,533.04 in total compensation that I should be paid under current work rules for the additional 17 days away, versus $1101.60 that I will be paid under the LOA.
Or, instead of the $37,502.88 that the company would have to pay me to keep me available to them in HKG for 30 days, they will be able to keep me at their beck-and-call for just $14,071.44. That means the company just saved $23,431.44 in compensation that should have to be paid to me under the current work rules.
Or, lets assume the company wont pay one guy that much draft, and instead will just pay straight pay to use four FO's to get the same 30 days of coverage in HKG. Why four? The company would have to spend a minimum of 3 days deadheading each FO over there, and 2 days back. That means that first and second FO's trips would consist of 8 days of duty plus 5 days of deadheading, or a 13 day trip. That leaves 14 days of coverage open, so two FO's would have to split that with each getting 7 days of duty, plus 5 days of deadheading. Or, two 12 day trips. Assuming each was also a 9-year FO, then the first and second FO's trips would be worth $12,969.84, and the third and fourth FO's would be worth $11,972.16.
Added together, the compensation required to get 30 days of coverage with four FO's, the total compensation the company would have to pay under the current work rules would be $49,884.
So, under the LOA (if it passes), the company will be able to keep me at their beck-and-call for 30 days in HKG for just $14,071.44, versus paying me $37,502.88, or paying four guys a total of $49,884.
Any way you cut it, the company saves between $23,000 and $35,000 on each and every FO of my seniority that they can STV.
That my friend, is a HUGE CONCESSION on our part, and a HUGE SAVINGS for the company. I can now understand why the company is excited about the large sums of money that can be made with the opening of these FDA's. Unfortuntely, a large chunk of the money is going to come out of our hides.
Let's not forget the deadhead money the company will be saving.
From the July bidpack.
MEM-LAX - NW - $458
LAX-HKG - CX - $3977
HKG-LAX - CX - $3760
LAX-MEM - NW - $463
Total = $8658
Add in the cost of ground transportation costs to the company, and the total cost to deadhead one pilot over to and back from HKG is approx. $9000.
Deadhead one FO with the STV - cost to the company (minus hotel cost which just about even out) = $14,071 + $9000 = approx. $23,071
Deadhead four FO's with our current work rules - cost to the company = $49,884 + ($9000 x 4 = $36,000) = $85,884.
Total savings to the company by using STV = $62,813!!!
We're going to give up this amount of money, and give the company this kind of savings all for some POSSIBLE scope improvements and an inadequate $2700 housing allowance? Uhhh, NO!
Last edited by hyperone; 07-27-2007 at 03:55 PM. Reason: More Math!
07-27-2007, 02:50 PM
#44
done, gone skiing
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Rocking chair
Posts: 1,601
Money, Money, Money
The fix is simple, no STV. period, nada. If they need bodies than do a SIBA until the FDA is properly staffed. Want to throw the company a bone, OK, hows this. Allow 30 day trips, with certain provisions; !. Spouse and one other paid to "visit" during the total "trip" time, 2. Hotel with rooms that allow cooking (suites type). 3. Can't be forced more than once a year.
Its all about the money. 30 days X 6 hrs per day, I think you'll have no problems filling slots!
Its all about the money. 30 days X 6 hrs per day, I think you'll have no problems filling slots!
07-27-2007, 04:07 PM
#47
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: A300 F/O
Posts: 217
What if?
Can somebody give me a brief description of what life will be like for a junior pilot flying out of HKG if the LOA gets voted down?
On a separate note, I've heard the numbers thrown around concerning the housing allowance that C. Pacific gives their crewmembers. I was told yesterday that they get this allowance because their crewmembers are salary only (i.e. Captains make $136K-ish regardless of their schedule) and that their company said that the increased housing allowance was the least they could do for them). Can anybody confirm this? Kind of takes some of the wind out of THIS sail considering most of our WB Captains typically make almost 150% of this amount).
On a separate note, I've heard the numbers thrown around concerning the housing allowance that C. Pacific gives their crewmembers. I was told yesterday that they get this allowance because their crewmembers are salary only (i.e. Captains make $136K-ish regardless of their schedule) and that their company said that the increased housing allowance was the least they could do for them). Can anybody confirm this? Kind of takes some of the wind out of THIS sail considering most of our WB Captains typically make almost 150% of this amount).
07-27-2007, 04:39 PM
#48
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 2,889
I think if you selectively pick pieces and parts out of any contract, you can make it look great or terrible.
The Cathay comparison may or may not be valid, but I suspect its apples/oranges.
A more realistic way to look at it is look at what you'd bring home, after taxes and the PWC process, and look at the Q of life you can have at those rates. Then make your own decision as to whether you think its worth doing.
The Cathay comparison may or may not be valid, but I suspect its apples/oranges.
A more realistic way to look at it is look at what you'd bring home, after taxes and the PWC process, and look at the Q of life you can have at those rates. Then make your own decision as to whether you think its worth doing.
07-27-2007, 04:51 PM
#49
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
In my discussion with various MEC members I have refined my argument on why I don't think we will be paid for DH travel to a STV. Here it is for famed arbitrator Busboy (after the political discussion) to rule on:
I am not buying it, here is the language in the LOA:
A pilot shall be entitled to one business class ticket positioning him to the STV location at the beginning of his assignment and back to his permanent base at the conclusion of his assignment. The Company shall also provide a pilot’s dependents with one round-trip coach class ticket from the pilot’s permanent residence to the FDA location during the assignment.
This language closely resembles Section 5.H.1:
The following additional provisions shall apply to a pilot holding an FDA assignment:
1. A pilot, and dependents who relocate to the FDA location, shall be provided one way air transportation to the FDA location prior to the commencement of the assignment and return transportation to the pilot's domicile at the conclusion of his assignment.
I don't think pilots relocating to/from Subic get paid DH money. Basically the LOA says Pilots on an STV are paid like Pilots at an FDA accept they get per diem when not on a trip.
Think about it this way, pilots on an STV will only be paid for individual trips. These trips will start and end in HKG. There will not be a series of pairings in the HKG Bid Pack saying "DH HKG" or "HKG DH". The cap on credit hours also plays into my paranoia. I believe HK is at least a 30 hour round trip DH. There will be no lines at HKG that will fit after you take out the 30 hours. If the company wanted to pay DH hours they would have submitted something in the LOA that raises the cap on monthly BLG.
Finally if the company intended to pay DH expenses they would not have changed the language from what is in CBA 5.G.1:
The following additional provisions apply to a pilot holding a temporary vacancy:
1.The Company shall provide a pilot holding a temporary vacancy with:
a. Deadhead transportation between his base and the domicile of his temporary vacancy at the beginning and end of the temporary vacancy;
Legally Special Temporary Vacancies are different from Temporary Vacancies, otherwise we wouldn't need the LOA.
I am not buying it, here is the language in the LOA:
A pilot shall be entitled to one business class ticket positioning him to the STV location at the beginning of his assignment and back to his permanent base at the conclusion of his assignment. The Company shall also provide a pilot’s dependents with one round-trip coach class ticket from the pilot’s permanent residence to the FDA location during the assignment.
This language closely resembles Section 5.H.1:
The following additional provisions shall apply to a pilot holding an FDA assignment:
1. A pilot, and dependents who relocate to the FDA location, shall be provided one way air transportation to the FDA location prior to the commencement of the assignment and return transportation to the pilot's domicile at the conclusion of his assignment.
I don't think pilots relocating to/from Subic get paid DH money. Basically the LOA says Pilots on an STV are paid like Pilots at an FDA accept they get per diem when not on a trip.
Think about it this way, pilots on an STV will only be paid for individual trips. These trips will start and end in HKG. There will not be a series of pairings in the HKG Bid Pack saying "DH HKG" or "HKG DH". The cap on credit hours also plays into my paranoia. I believe HK is at least a 30 hour round trip DH. There will be no lines at HKG that will fit after you take out the 30 hours. If the company wanted to pay DH hours they would have submitted something in the LOA that raises the cap on monthly BLG.
Finally if the company intended to pay DH expenses they would not have changed the language from what is in CBA 5.G.1:
The following additional provisions apply to a pilot holding a temporary vacancy:
1.The Company shall provide a pilot holding a temporary vacancy with:
a. Deadhead transportation between his base and the domicile of his temporary vacancy at the beginning and end of the temporary vacancy;
Legally Special Temporary Vacancies are different from Temporary Vacancies, otherwise we wouldn't need the LOA.
07-27-2007, 06:18 PM
#50
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 118
Some folks have expressed concerns that without the LOA, FedEx will hire Chinese pilots in those slots. THIS WILL NEVER HAPPEN. Why? Because they already don't have enough English-speaking pilots for their own planes, as proven by Shanghai Airlines contracting with Mesa for Mesa pilots to fly the Shanghai Airlines equipment/routes. The Chinese military, which is the hatchery for ALL Chinese pilots, doesn't teach their pilots to speak English. Why not? So they won't defect. If they can't speak English, then the chances are huge that if they penetrate another country's airspace in a defect attempt that can't be communicated, they'll be shot down. China is AT LEAST 10-15 years from being up to speed in English-proficient pilots. This is a non-starter. We have nothing to fear about Chinese pilots taking our slots.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
