fdxflyer

Getting invol'ed is a lot more "screwed" than bidding yourself into a "screw" (that could rank as one of my worse sentence fragments).

Haywood JB

I don't think they will be able to fill all the slots to CDG or HKG in the right seat. Even with the numbers of people wanting to come in off of the streets, I don't believe the company is ready to shell out the money to hire them. Especially if they think we are already overmanned. I believe, especially with the way the crew force is, the Capt seats in both domiciles will be filled. Now these folks may be stuck there for a long time to keep the capt seat, but they will probably run that risk. Now as for the right seats, I really don't see folks bidding a narrow body right seat to go to either base. Personally I would bid back to the slave ship in MEM than take the bus or 75 in CDG or HKG. The newer SO's want out of the seat, but I would venture to say, those numbers won't fill up the right seat bids.

The LOA has many pitfalls all around. The STV needs to go away! With that, I wouldn't recommend anyone to vote for this POS. If the company has to involuntarily send someone away, it should be cost negative for them, and positive to the individual.

If the threats are going to be promises, let the company open the domicile. They've said it can't be opened without the tax equalization, which we don't have in place. They flinched once with the change to STV, the union needs to take advantage and fix this. ALPA can come back to the company and simply say, we didn't poll the crew force, and from the meetings in the hub, the members have expressed their discontent, so we want to change this before it gets voted down.

I can say though, that evertime I fly, every hub I turn through, I am going to try to drum up as many folks as possible to vote NO.

HJB

Cessna180DVR

If the LOA gets voted down, who in their right mind would take either seat to CDG without tax equalization? Seems like between taxes and housing, you'd be better off in the back of the 72. JMO

Carlos Abundis

4800 pilots, 4800 different agendas. Lots of pilots could swing it financially or would choose to suck it up for a couple of years.

Busboy

Good. If someone wants to bid the FDAs with or without the LOA. They can have it.

But they should think about how long they'll be there. Those couple years could end up being much longer. They need a vacancy, they can hold, to bid back out of the FDA's.

And, since many will be so far out of seniority...They will not be able to hold that seat, outside of their FDA.

sparkmo

The same could be asked about the proposed LOA too! Cheers!

Cessna180DVR

Do you know these "lots of pilots" willing to give away half their pay for French taxes and pay 3-4 grand a month on housing? I don't know any that would be willing to basically work for free to live in Paris, so I still think that if we vote this down, those seats will be empty. New hires? OK, but it would be their choice to take a position that is finacially infeasible just to get on with this company. Just as it would be any pilot's choice to bid the FDA's if the LOA is voted down....it's their choice at that point. I don't feel that I should have to vote for an inadequate LOA to protect pilots from themselves.

dckozak

What would be good to know, and even better for the union to dig out and pass to the crew force (I don't see FedEx doing so) is a clear understanding of what both a Capt and FO in CDG will have to pay in taxes to both the French and US governments and a realistic cost of housing. Determining what a guys take home would be after these two expenses would go a long way is determining if it is a (worthy? ) pay raise for a junior pilot and to what extent.

MD11Fr8Dog

Not true, IIRC, the postal LOA wanted us to give up 13 days as min days off for 11 days as min days off. It would have been a huge give back and they could have gotten up to 5 extra days from some folks for the pittance they were offering. Also, the economy turned somewhat and in the end they didn't need the LOA to get ramped up. Not saying they aren't cranking up the optimizer, but the company got a little "lucky" when we turned down the LOA in that in the end they didn't need it.

MaydayMark

Dude ... I think you're kidding yourself. Although the lagacy carriers have started to recall pilots that have been furloughed for some time, there are still thousands of furloughed folks (including prior 757 qualified folks) that would jump at the opportunity to get a FedEx seniority number. Without the LOA it will be international work rules, intl override and intl per diem.

Be carfeul with those blinders on. You could get run over by the rush of furloughed pilots flighting to get that job.