Future Contract Issues
 

Ok, the LOA battle is in full swing so no better time to start thinking about our future contract inputs. Here is mine so far:

1. B777 pay equal to A380 pay...gonna need an LOA within a year or so.
2. Scheduling, blunt the effects of the optimizer....thru any means available.
3. Scheduling, be able to trade R-Days for trips.
4. Publish VTO lines 3-4 days earlier in the bid month.

Anyone else?

But BC says we don't need an LOA because B777 = A380! :rolleyes:

Veba
 

I think VEBA will need to be expanded or deleted.

The contract age cut-off eliminated quite a few pilots on the Seniority List. I really would hate to use "negotiating capital" on this issue, but it will need to include the other pilots who were not 53 on the day of signng the contract (and those already retired within a certain window).

BC said what?
 

Looks to me like Sec. 3 only has the A380 written down. Once again if it isn't in writing......

Forgot One
 

Age 60 to remain the normal/accepted retirement age. If you wanna work longer, ok, but no penalty for retiring at 60. Treat it like the DOD treats a 20 year retirement.

Yea, I know, but BC says it is in writing. He collected all of the company's press releases since the announcement of the B777 and they supposedly say that B777=A380! ;)

Eliminate the early retirement penalty.
 

In an effort to "mitigate the damage", we should negotiate a full retirement after 25 years. Hopefully, I'll make it to 57 years old here with 25 years of service. I'd like to retire with no penalty. That would be fair and mitigate some of the damage for me.

Viagra included in the catering for guys 60 and older on VCP trips...:D

Kinda gives a whole new meaning to the term "Mini Snack"!;)

A-Fund.
Higher pay rates for F/Os (captains, too!) to mitigate Age 60.

I'd say scope, (sarcasm alert) but it was such a cornerstone of the last negotiations that we had to write a new LOA to protect it.

...from who's persepctive? ;);)

Things I would like in next contract:

- 3 hour call out for the bottom half of reserves or r-lines that you bid for 3 hour call out.
- if we cant get full retirement after 25 yos then how about at least full credit for all my yos.
- another option is to allow after 25 yos a reduced retirement until the normal retirement age.
- if your scheduled layover is less than 12 hours then you get higher perdiem rate or some kind of money bump to allow you to order a room service meal and not make you go hunting for affordable food. And by meal I mean something other than soup and salad or a chicken quesadilla or the marriot burger.
-something other than a 3% cola that just washes out with the optimizer.

I definitely agree that we should be able to retire after 25 years of service without any penalty. If not that, then we should be credited for every year of service we perform! (ie. 35 years of service equals 70% of your high five for retirement)

I don't want to see trading R days for trips.

No retirement penalty for 25 yos service or more.

Massive B-plan bump or massive 401k match bump to mitigate imminent loss of pension and/or B-plan.

No more flying to PEK. Sorry, just got the run around there again.

Wait, I almost forgot! What about the improvements to the FDAs that all the YES voters are talking about?! "Get the language in now, we'll fix it on the next contract." Yeah, right.

1. Option for a ROTH 401(k) would be wise.
2. Maintain combined A Plan and B Plan.
3. Raise the uniform allowance to at least $250.
4. Have more transparency with the Scheduling Optimizer with Union oversight.
5. Have a stronger recourse with Disputed Pairings. These pairings aren't just "tough," they compromise safety and we need to limit those flights where crews say "that pairing was not safe."
6. Profit sharing/stock purchase. This was something we lost several years ago, but it is good business and motivates all employees to maximize profits.
7. Clear "meet and greet" guidelines for hiring/recruiting fairness.
8. If the retirement age is changed to 65, there needs to be a process established to report deficiencies to protect those under 60 forced to fly with them.
9. Quarterly deviation banks. Yearly would be great, but monthly is just not manageable.
10. Create gateways in addition to domiciles. As we go international combined with the number of commuters, domiciles should still exist with the option of claiming a gateway: places like Newark, Chicago (or Indy), Seattle, etc. Those places to where we send most deadheads would qualify and it would work like staging requests.
11. Family travel benefits on airlines.

I'm pretty sure this is already in the benefit book? 3 percent hit per year from what you would have gotten. ie if you already have 25 yos and age 57, the reduction is 9 percent?

A cadre of small, professional inflight security specialists to help us cope with the growing terror threat. They can ride the jumpseats on every flight and can be armed ala the FFDO program.

To allow max fuel savings and min w/b disruption, they need to have a maximum weight--I'm thinking around 135-140 pounds. They should be VERY fit for the rigorous job, and as such should probably be young...say 18-40 max. Additional duties during flight might include helping with the catering and providing fatigue reducing massage therapy during cruise flight. Also to prevent fatigue, some enroute entertainment--perhaps some exotic dancing--could help keep everyone awake and alert during those critical period arrivals.

To improve crew compatibility issues, crews will be able to swing by "security" offices to select a security officer for flight. These offices will be managed like Jumpseats---there will be a pool of security officers standing by to join crews. Although F/Os will have input, captains will maintain final authority for selection. Non-selected Security officers will remain as reserves for stand-by crews and ad-hoc pairings.

Due to the size, weight, and temperment requirements the logical source for the pool of new security officers will be SFS, VCP, any Scandanavian country, Singapore, and a few other well known hotspots for locating similar talent.

A small cadre of larger Security officers will be available for those captains who do not feel "safe" with a 135 pound or less Security officer. As our mantra is "no one left behind", a few larger security officers (over 200 pounds, six feet tall or better, etc) will be available for our female crewmembers. Duties remain the same, but these candidates will be recruited mostly from Australia or (again) Scandanavian countries.

Who says our flights cannot be safer, more secure, and more enjoyable? I think a unified crew force could certainly make a strong case. Remember--security is in everyone's best interests.

Now that's funny, I don't care who you are!!

That's more than funny; it's hilarious!

I don't think it's funny!!



I'm hoping that he's serious.

How about a lump sum option for retirement....

Cause, on average, I don't think we (ex-Fedex pilots) live too long after retirement.

A very good point. I'll give you a yes vote on the lump sum retirement option.

I am very concerned about security so I would like the option of two 135 pound security officers on each of my flights. :D

Fedex wants to give us a lump sum. Just a big lump and a small sum.

I have always found it very interesting when security officers really get along. Perhaps a pair of them per flight might be required on the widebodies--you know--with one as a RSO. Key word is "relief".

Disruption pay for the 'Floating R day' that always happens during the most important family events, of course.

On face value I'm not sure I want to see this either. Maybe someone could explain how this works without undermining the reserve system and seniority.

I flew with a senior Captain recently who expressed concern that junior guys are bidding carry-over reserve lines and then conflicting with another reserve line to allow them to pick up CIC trips which, as most realize, are awarded before Open Time is released or VTO lines are built. Current rules allow this so you can't fault anyone for doing it but the Captain was concerned that very senior trips were getting picked up by very junior guys out of seniority.

Please don't shoot the messenger! I am high enough on the F/O list that I haven't bid reserve in 10 years.

This is my two cents however. If we don't deal with this LOA now we will have to expend resources and bagaining chips during negotiations to try and fix it then. Where will it fall on the list of priorities and what would we forgo to insure it was fixed? Before or after 777 pay, lump sum, optimizer issues, etc. Where do you want to insert "Fix the LOA"? Let's deal with the LOA now as a stand alone issue.

There are several rules that make carryover an attractive option for some. Think about it: Its in the company's interest to get a few more days work at straight pay, so the rules are set up to give the c/o guys a "bonus".

Lines, secondary lines, and CIC are all processed in seniority order. A guy who puts in for a CIC trip does so because his LINE was affected by the conflict. The rules are set up to give a lineholder priority over a guy getting a secondary line or surfing open time.

But, weren't the trips originally awarded based on seniority, and then the person awarded the trip chose to drop them for some reason --- i.e. vacation, training, etc.

Once in "Open Time" senior guys don't have any advantage in picking up trips do they?

Also, if this really works, don't senior guys have first choice in applying this approach to bidding their monthly schedules --- meaning they can bid a straight line, reserve or VTO?

You want to reduce carry over trips.....make Sunday the first day of the bid month instead of Monday. Many of the 727 carry over trips begin with Sunday deadheads. This had been talked up in the past but never caught on.

I believe his main concern was that a VTO line is processed after CIC trips are awarded.

If he has any seniority in his VTO, he could have bid the reserve w/co line and then cherry-picked the cic trip. If he has no seniority, the good trip would have been eaten up by the vto guys above him.

I would like to see an open time window. Where the trip are processed in senority order. The windows currently open when a large percent of the crew force is a way from a computer.

Agree that the CIC/VTO/Secondary line issue encourages carry over bidding. Do we want to encourage that?

Careful we don't get into the PBS neighborhood.....which IMO is a swamp

But that is what we have from the time the lines are released till the secondary lines are released. It is just not handled via senority.

FDXLAG-
Wish I had a good answer for you. Aside from building bidpacks without any carryover lines, IMO, I don't see how you can stop pilots from bidding them.

From personal experience: I bid the 4 or 5 lines that I want, then I bid carryover lines because I know it is a chance to tweak my schedule when the window opens. Just think the CIC and Secondary lines should be handled in the same window via senority.

Albie, here's your Security Officer! :D

http://www.usdreams.com/photos%20ach...monsRP44KS.jpg

How'd you scan that from your wallet?