Quote:
I believe that this IS the key issue with this entire LOA - "strategically" - "long-term"
Having said that, you are correct, you will not find any specific wording in the LOA (or the Attachment A letter) that says anything to the affect of - "we, the company, agree to use only FedEx pilots to fly this freight overseas from this day forward....." - I have been looking for it myself from day one, and have concluded - it is NOT there.
I don't even know what all the legal ramifications/possibilities of such language would be -
This issue is why the company AND the union are having such difficulty in "pleading their cases" to the masses.
The bottom line is that it boils down to an issue of trust - and that is taboo when it comes to (traditional/historical) company/union relationships.
I know I'm gonna take a lot of flak for the following statement, but it's what I believe so.........
I think that our company and union are trying to get our pilot group to understand that TRUST is the long-term/strategic goal that they are both working towards.
And, if you don't TRUST the company or the union when they say that this whole thing is geared towards OUR PILOTS flying FRED'S FREIGHT all over the world........then you're gonna have to vote no.
If you trust them, that, strategically/long-term it "secures the flying for US", then you should vote yes.
That's basically what it has all boiled down to for me - strategic/long-term picture/incremental gains and trust.......vs.......tactical advantage now/short-term picture and mistrust.
(long answer to say, I agree - it's not written in there anywhere)
Thanks for the response. I was truly hoping you would have found actual contractual Scope/Recognition enhancement.Originally Posted by AFW_MD11
I TOTALLY agree with you on this point. That's why I have gone back and forth on support/non-support.I believe that this IS the key issue with this entire LOA - "strategically" - "long-term"
Having said that, you are correct, you will not find any specific wording in the LOA (or the Attachment A letter) that says anything to the affect of - "we, the company, agree to use only FedEx pilots to fly this freight overseas from this day forward....." - I have been looking for it myself from day one, and have concluded - it is NOT there.
I don't even know what all the legal ramifications/possibilities of such language would be -
ie
. can they even put something like that in an agreement that applies internationally - ??? I'm not a lawyer, I don't known.This issue is why the company AND the union are having such difficulty in "pleading their cases" to the masses.
The bottom line is that it boils down to an issue of trust - and that is taboo when it comes to (traditional/historical) company/union relationships.
I know I'm gonna take a lot of flak for the following statement, but it's what I believe so.........
I think that our company and union are trying to get our pilot group to understand that TRUST is the long-term/strategic goal that they are both working towards.
And, if you don't TRUST the company or the union when they say that this whole thing is geared towards OUR PILOTS flying FRED'S FREIGHT all over the world........then you're gonna have to vote no.
If you trust them, that, strategically/long-term it "secures the flying for US", then you should vote yes.
That's basically what it has all boiled down to for me - strategic/long-term picture/incremental gains and trust.......vs.......tactical advantage now/short-term picture and mistrust.
(long answer to say, I agree - it's not written in there anywhere)
It is not really a trust/mistrust issue, nor should it be. It is simply a contractual business agreement. I trust my knowledge of the Company - I understand their goals. I'm becoming uncertain of the Union. However, that does not impact weighing the merits of a presented proposal. It simply is what it is.
If the enhancements for the Company provided by the LOA and Attachment A provided the incentive for the Company to ensure FedEx Pilots are flying the freight, it would not have been to difficult to put it in writing through Scope amendment. They chose not to do that. As a result, Scope and Recognition remain exactly as they currently exist. No one in that room, from either side, can make a verbal statement or promise that can be assured of becoming fact. The reality is that if it is not written, it does not really exist.
It has already been made clear from both JL and the recent ALPA comm. that if this is voted down, they believe it will still be FedEx guys flying the freight. That is, obviously, with no changes to Scope.
So, when Scope enhancements, real and perceived, depart the pattern, other factors then need to determine the yes/no vote. This thing may still be worth a yes vote. Maybe not.
Not trying to get stuck on Scope. I don't like that, in my opinion, ALPA is doing what should be the Company's job of misrepresenting enhancements as reality, when they are not. I just would prefer to see votes occurring based on the actual wording of the LOA and attachment, not on perceptions or beliefs of what lies between the lines.
Sorry for rambling.