"For those pilots who were age 60 or under on the effective date of this
legislation, they may remain in their current crew positions until
attainment of age 65. For pilots who were over age 60 on the effective
date of this legislation and who indicated a desire to transition to
second officer rather than retire, those pilots will remain as second
officers in our system until such time as they can secure a vacancy bid
based on their seniority."

I guess Foxhunter's gonna have to wait for an opening.

 

"I guess Foxhunter's gonna have to wait for an opening."

Not very long if my crew notification cancelling the last bid is accurate..this is a bunch of caca..

 

I wouldn't expect the bid to be canceled.

 

No, I think the biggest problem is the following line inserted in our contract by DW and his merry band. Down/Lateral Bid Freeze

A pilot who is activated in a crew status that requires ITU training based on a down/lateral bid shall be frozen in that crew status for 24 months, commencing on his actual activation date. A pilot is not eligible for a permanent crew position award requiring ITU training with a projected training date during that freeze period except under the following conditions:

1. the pilot was excessed or down/lateral bid to relieve an excess; or
2. the pilot down bid because of legal restrictions.

A vacancy bid MUST be required according to current book, BUT this little line inserted in the contract will divide this crew force for a very long time.

 

PC's FCIF follow-up is on the web-site

 

"O" spoke to us at RGS today and alluded that the company's position was pretty close to ALPA's and this seems that way - have to wait for a vacancy bid !

He also said there are 230-240 over 60 SOs and only about about 150 that are "players" - ie. can hold a medical and are younger than 63.

His math showed him that if 100% of the guys/gals that will turn 60 in the next five years will create an over manning of about 780 pilots. His "guess" is that 66% will stay, only his guess. He said that 2 wks ago his guess was no hiring for 18-24 months, now he says about 3 yrs, except to fill the FDAs, which there will be another bid soon and if no new takers, then they will hire into the FDAs.

 

Wow....at some point, even the bean counters have to admit it may be more "cost effective" from the company's standpoint to increase the compensation package in the FDAs in order to fill the 50+ vacancies internally, rather than hire 50 more new hires we won't need for another 3 yrs.

 

"O" spoke to you at RGS. Is this the little girl whisper I've got a secret management style taught at Yale? Does he just prefer to inform by rumor?

 

vacancy.

ask our EB what vacancy means. you could reference the meaning and intent but that may offer a hurdle for the a very small group.

better question to ask- what's up with the mgt. sups. merging into our list.

best question- will the mgt. issue be long gone- collecting dust- if meaning and intent is ignored and vacancy is defined as displacement?

just curious.

 

"O" has been speaking to the RGS classes for the past couple of months, he didn't speak to me personally. He was as upfront as he possibly could be and could not say exactly what the company's position was while the lawyers were still talking with the FAA. I'm not sure what "rumors" you are referring to. He actually talked about the "rumors" that are out there - cancelling the bid, furlough, etc. He stated that while the bids couldn't be cancelled , and they haven't been, individual awards could be. He also stated that PC's position is that FedEx has never furloughed and PC didn't want to start now - seems PC stated as much in his FCIF. Where are the rumors? He also talked about the MD-10 program being cancelled rumor - said its not true and that it is actually being accelerated. His "spin" on the "parking jets" rumor is that they are just using the opportunity to accelerate maintaince. He said there are approx 3000/month less block hrs available in Jan.