While age 60 has something to do with this I think it is also a function of trying to fill the FDAs at any cost (accept paying a decent cola). I think they are trying to scare more people overseas.

 

Okay. Early questions--

Do we think this means that the WHOLE bid is canxed except for HKG and CDG to include the excesses from Subic? That couldn't be.

Can we speculate that there has been some significant adjustments to the move packages in order to make it more attractive for these new captains openings that they are going to bid?

This should be interesting...

WM

 

Putting together a list?

ExpressJet has, for sure.

I was told that SkyWest did, but that should be confirmed by someone.

 

FDD -

What position were you awarded?

How many people junior to you were also awarded this seat/domicile on 07-03?

Approximately, when were you scheduled for upgrade training?

Thanks for sharing.

 

I know my Feb 25 727 F/O class was canceled.

 

Worst news, hull losses aside, I've seen in my 13+ yrs at FDX.

 

Magnum:

You're right, I'm trying to be optimistic in the face of what might be terrible news for the crew force. Here's what I see (VERY optimistic):

1) Company isn't happy with the results of FDA as far as the seniority of the guys they wanted. Therefore, I think they'll sweeten the pot in order to try to get dudes to bid it. Long shot. I recommend they offer MGMT move packages and a sliding Euro/Dollar/Yuan thing to everyone and there wouldn't be any problem filling it with senior bubbas. Gotta take care of the substandard money issues.
2) More questions than answers on this PC FCIF.

It guarantees to be an interesting week.

 

You'll stay a captain (my bet) and your BLG won't get hit that hard. 3000 hours off the BLG / 4700 pilots means the impact will be spread across a lot of folks. Yeah...I know if you divide that by LINES the impact will be greater, but less BLG should mean a few more lines. I haven't broken out a calculator, but I have to think the impact per line could be 5 hours or less if that 3000 number is accurate.

Here are some pluses: More time off every month. Drop 5-8 hours off the BLG and you get an extra day to work on a masters, re-model a house, work on a side gig, do some work at the ANG, play with your kids. If you have been living on BLG + 3 extra trips + zero savings...damn...life is going to get stressful. If you've been dropping the nuisance trip the last 2-3 years, the company may just "drop" it for you. What we need to make sure is that if the BLG DOES drop, we do not spread it across 15/19 R days for reserve line holders. We need to adjust the days down and keep the current 4.5-4.7 hours per day. While open time will likely be scarce, there will still be some available.

If the company really wants to downsize, here are some ideas. They should appreciate and encourage the guys who want to take mil leave--you will still be paying some of their benefits but you won't be paying them for trips they don't fly. That ought to change some of the ACP's tune if they realize they can slide a guy off the payroll here and there and everyone wins. They should be liberal with guys who want to fly some corporate on the side who might still have some contacts for ad-hoc part time work. They should allow the guys who moved over from corporate to go back--but keep their line numbers. They should consider letting some pilots who have management/safety experience to move back into their old jobs while still protecting that line number and benefits. There are lots of ways to shrink the available pilot pool without poking everyone in the eye or taking it only out of the hide of the most junior.

I've had plenty to say about some of the previous negoatiations that have taken place, but one thing I can say about times like these is it is very easy to make the union the "bad guy" in discussions by the company or line guys. It is very unneverving when someone faces downsizing, pay cuts, or furloughs. Typically, what I've seen is the emotional impact is usually very disproportionate to the actual financial damage incurred. People are going to be pinging, angry, and looking for a scapegoat. When the MEC says "No" to any company proposals, there are going to be some who SCREAM that the union is NOT working with the company and its somehow their fault. That isn't the case at all. When the company negotiated with us last time they stalled, drug their feet, offered an initial lowball offer, and did all the things any company trying to delay paying more wages would do. Now they are going to come after us with a sense of urgency unseen in the past. We need to collectively gather our courage and negotiate to everyone's benefit--not just knee jerk settlements or bad compromises.

A final thought. I suspect some of the latest company angst is the loss of the court case indicating the corporation might be owing a lot of back taxes. The company tried to go "cheap", and called some of its drivers independent contractors. Now that may bite the company, although I don't for a minute think we are going to pay over $300 million dollars in a single payment--I figure a partial settlement paid over installments is more realistic based on the fact the government doesn't want to crush its income producing organisms. The thought that leaps out at me is that sometimes penny wise is pound foolish. Nobody in flight ops wants to kill the golden goose. We know customers ultimately pay our salary, insurance, and vacation benefits. But we also know that a fair wage and compensation package amortized over solid performace and a motivated work force creates a solid company built for the long haul. UPS has managed to be profitable despite paying union wages for years. In the short term, the lower wages allowed us to move in and take market share, but the cost of the "shortcut" may eliminate a lot of those gains. Just like going "cheap" on the LOA left vacancies unfilled and created a lot of headaches, I cannot help but believe a more long term view--one where the employees are at least partially considered an "investment" and not just a "cost" will help both the company and employees profit in the future.

 

Albie,

I loved your post. I agree with all of it except: this last line? I don't see that happening without a major upheaval of mid and upper MGT. This place has LONG been operating on the backs of the guys in the trenches. I just don't see MGT having the epiphany you're looking for.

This much is certain, things are changing. IMHO, if MGT was smart, they'd be putting together some sort of fair early out program for pilots. It was done before for other segments of the company. We'll see.

For now, the numbers to remember are: 68 and 85 min monthly prior to having to haggle other options.

 

Albie,

My real concern has not really been the current over 60 guys, but the future over 60 guys. As "O" told us in RGS today, if no one retired in the next 5 yrs, unrealistic, we would have an extra 780 guys than the company had planned. The real loser, at a minimum, is the pilot not hired yet.

While I agree it would be pretty drastic that BLGs get reduced on a large scale, I do foresee some reduction in the future. How much, who knows, but I am going to operate my personal life under the assumption that over the next 3-5 yrs, I will see a 10-20% reduction in BLG. Just being prudent. Best case scenario is 3-5 more yrs on reserve than I would have been. Faced with th alternative, not too bad, I guess.

I hope you're right and I'm wrong!