My NC Speaks for Me. I voted YES.
07-28-2007, 10:25 AM
#11
Gets Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: Nordskog Industries Field Technician
Posts: 688
Originally Posted by Carlos Abundis
Hey, FDXLAG, nice job cherry-picking that quote out of the first paragraph. If you read a little further, you would have seen where JL said:
"Here's why the company cannot renegotiate the LOA terms."
You want to roll the dice against those odds?
"Here's why the company cannot renegotiate the LOA terms."
You want to roll the dice against those odds?
I say fix it now.
07-28-2007, 10:26 AM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Originally Posted by Carlos Abundis
Hey, FDXLAG, nice job cherry-picking that quote out of the first paragraph. If you read a little further, you would have seen where JL said:
"Here's why the company cannot renegotiate the LOA terms."
You want to roll the dice against those odds?
"Here's why the company cannot renegotiate the LOA terms."
You want to roll the dice against those odds?
07-28-2007, 10:27 AM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: A300 Captain
Posts: 257
Originally Posted by Carlos Abundis
You want to roll the dice against those odds?
07-28-2007, 10:27 AM
#14
Gets Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: Nordskog Industries Field Technician
Posts: 688
Originally Posted by av8rmike
Not to disagree, but only to counter your assertions with the facts.
Already proven wrong by the reduction from 3 bid periods to 1 bid period.
Here are the applicable LOA sections:
5. During the period of the CDG FDA and/or the HKG FDA assignment, the laws of the United States and the laws of the states within the United States shall at all times apply to the employment relationship between me and Federal Express. Neither the laws of France, China or Hong Kong nor the laws of any other country or territory shall apply to the employment relationship between Federal Express and me.
-and-
7. I shall continue to be a member of the craft or class of fight deck crewmembers of Federal Express currently represented by ALPA pursuant to the Railway Labor Act. ALPA will continue to act as my exclusive collective bargaining representative during my assignment at the CDG FDA and/or the HKG FDA.
-and-
10. No court or agency outside the United States, including those in France, China, or Hong Kong, shall have jurisdiction to consider claims arising out of the employment relationship between Federal Express and myself.
Here is what our CBA says regarding scope:
2. “International flights” are all Company flights which originate from, terminate in or transit the U.S. or its territories via a location outside the contiguous 48 states. International flights also include all flights conducted by any pilots on the Federal Express Master Seniority List assigned to Foreign Duty Assignment (“FDA”), or Special International Bid Award (“SIBA”).
-and-
3. All Domestic and International revenue flights conducted with aircraft that are owned, leased, or operated by the Company, having a MTOGW of greater than 60,000 lbs., and operated pursuant to the Company’s Airline Operating Certificate or any additional Part 121 Airline Operating Certificate obtained by the Company, shall be operated by pilots on the Federal Express Master Seniority List in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. Flying conducted with aircraft at or under 60,000 lbs.
-and-
4. Notwithstanding any other provision of the Agreement, the Company may continue to interline, co-load, code-share, part charter and enter into block space agreements with other carriers to move freight and service in International (outside the contiguous 48 states) markets as required. Within the Domestic system (the contiguous 48 United States) the use of the above shall be done only: (1) when necessary to expedite or (2) when economically necessary, unless otherwise agreed to by the parties
Therefore, your assertion that there are Scope improvements in the LOA is completely incorrect. The LOA does not change the definition of 'Inernational flights' nor does it in any way alter the ability of the company to interline, co-load, code-share, or part charter and enter into block space agreements with other carriers in the International markets. What it does is offer protections to the company from foreign courts by forcing crewmembers to sign this.
Vote as you see fit, just don't vote based on something that is not true.
Already proven wrong by the reduction from 3 bid periods to 1 bid period.
Here are the applicable LOA sections:
5. During the period of the CDG FDA and/or the HKG FDA assignment, the laws of the United States and the laws of the states within the United States shall at all times apply to the employment relationship between me and Federal Express. Neither the laws of France, China or Hong Kong nor the laws of any other country or territory shall apply to the employment relationship between Federal Express and me.
-and-
7. I shall continue to be a member of the craft or class of fight deck crewmembers of Federal Express currently represented by ALPA pursuant to the Railway Labor Act. ALPA will continue to act as my exclusive collective bargaining representative during my assignment at the CDG FDA and/or the HKG FDA.
-and-
10. No court or agency outside the United States, including those in France, China, or Hong Kong, shall have jurisdiction to consider claims arising out of the employment relationship between Federal Express and myself.
Here is what our CBA says regarding scope:
2. “International flights” are all Company flights which originate from, terminate in or transit the U.S. or its territories via a location outside the contiguous 48 states. International flights also include all flights conducted by any pilots on the Federal Express Master Seniority List assigned to Foreign Duty Assignment (“FDA”), or Special International Bid Award (“SIBA”).
-and-
3. All Domestic and International revenue flights conducted with aircraft that are owned, leased, or operated by the Company, having a MTOGW of greater than 60,000 lbs., and operated pursuant to the Company’s Airline Operating Certificate or any additional Part 121 Airline Operating Certificate obtained by the Company, shall be operated by pilots on the Federal Express Master Seniority List in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. Flying conducted with aircraft at or under 60,000 lbs.
-and-
4. Notwithstanding any other provision of the Agreement, the Company may continue to interline, co-load, code-share, part charter and enter into block space agreements with other carriers to move freight and service in International (outside the contiguous 48 states) markets as required. Within the Domestic system (the contiguous 48 United States) the use of the above shall be done only: (1) when necessary to expedite or (2) when economically necessary, unless otherwise agreed to by the parties
Therefore, your assertion that there are Scope improvements in the LOA is completely incorrect. The LOA does not change the definition of 'Inernational flights' nor does it in any way alter the ability of the company to interline, co-load, code-share, or part charter and enter into block space agreements with other carriers in the International markets. What it does is offer protections to the company from foreign courts by forcing crewmembers to sign this.
Vote as you see fit, just don't vote based on something that is not true.
Obviously not.
07-28-2007, 10:28 AM
#15
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 90
Carlos,
You are definitely entitled to your opinion. JL is entitled to his. I just happen to disagree. Should we just accept the companies openers for the next contract if they tell us that is all there is, or the best they can do, or they will do it with us or without us? What if JL says so? Why even negotiate at all? Maybe we should just have the negotiating committee come up with a contract and vote on it for us. We don't need to vote!
Would you have thought the LOA was fine if the company had said we'll give you an extra $20,000 a month for bidding the FDA? Sure. "Okay, how about just $20? After all, we've established what you are and now we're just negotiating price."
This is a substandard deal for any Fortune 500 company.
Conner
You are definitely entitled to your opinion. JL is entitled to his. I just happen to disagree. Should we just accept the companies openers for the next contract if they tell us that is all there is, or the best they can do, or they will do it with us or without us? What if JL says so? Why even negotiate at all? Maybe we should just have the negotiating committee come up with a contract and vote on it for us. We don't need to vote!
Would you have thought the LOA was fine if the company had said we'll give you an extra $20,000 a month for bidding the FDA? Sure. "Okay, how about just $20? After all, we've established what you are and now we're just negotiating price."
This is a substandard deal for any Fortune 500 company.
Conner
07-28-2007, 10:32 AM
#16
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 63
Originally Posted by MaxKts
Carlos,
Man - get a grip on yourself. The company blinked with their STD side letter and they are just trying to get us to blink back with JL's psuedo red letter.
It's just business and they want us doing their business!
By saying "My Negotiating Committee Speaks for ME" are you saying that you agreed it was OK for the MEC to roll over on us and support the age 65 thing when the majority of FedEx pilots were not in favor of change?
Man - get a grip on yourself. The company blinked with their STD side letter and they are just trying to get us to blink back with JL's psuedo red letter.
It's just business and they want us doing their business!
By saying "My Negotiating Committee Speaks for ME" are you saying that you agreed it was OK for the MEC to roll over on us and support the age 65 thing when the majority of FedEx pilots were not in favor of change?
Addressing your point, MaxKts, yes, this is business. But every business decision, as you know, has its consequences. You can't just wish everything your way. You have to bargain the best you can and be prepared to accept less than perfection.
If our guys on the MEC/NC who spent the time to research and bargain over this agreement say this is the best deal we can get right now, I'm inclined to believe them.
By the way, I don't like the way Age 60 played out either. But, for me, that's another thread.
07-28-2007, 10:35 AM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: ANC -11 FO
Posts: 189
Hey Carlos,
Could you please answer the question about how this LOA improves scope? I haven't been able to find it anywhere, but since it's one of the reaons you voted yes I was hoping you could point it out to me. Thanks.
Could you please answer the question about how this LOA improves scope? I haven't been able to find it anywhere, but since it's one of the reaons you voted yes I was hoping you could point it out to me. Thanks.
07-28-2007, 10:38 AM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: A300 CAP FDX
Posts: 287
Originally Posted by Carlos Abundis
If our guys on the MEC/NC who spent the time to research and bargain over this agreement say this is the best deal we can get right now, I'm inclined to believe them.
.
.
"If". Your first word is: IF. And for many, the perception is that this thing just wasn't well thought out, by FDX or our negotiators. But the real rub is in the idea that BC, et al, didn't do their homework.
07-28-2007, 10:38 AM
#19
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 63
Originally Posted by md11phlyer
Ahh, the 'no leverage' argument. Very prudent. When you were a kid did you let the bully beat you up because he was bigger and therefore you had 'no leverage'? Probably.
I say fix it now.
I say fix it now.
07-28-2007, 10:45 AM
#20
...Whatever It Is!
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,680
Originally Posted by Carlos Abundis
Actually, I was alluding to the fact that JL has proven to be a straight-shooter. I would take him at his word.
