FDX-contract improvements next negotiations
01-31-2008, 01:27 PM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: MD11 FO, ANC
Posts: 1,098
This is exactly the problem.......
Originally Posted by DLax85
I haven't seen it play out this way.
What I've seen is the published "accepted fare" in the bid pack is below what the company can actually purchase the ticket for a day or two before the trip because the airlines may have increased the price since the bid pack was published.
The only way the "accepted fare" will go up is if someone on the crew does NOT deviate thus forcing the company to pay the higher fare.
Then the you must show this documentation and get the accepted fare raised for the whole crew.
If no one actually deviates, the accepted fare remains unchanged, even though the company knows they cannot get a ticket back to MEM for that amount.
What I've seen is the published "accepted fare" in the bid pack is below what the company can actually purchase the ticket for a day or two before the trip because the airlines may have increased the price since the bid pack was published.
The only way the "accepted fare" will go up is if someone on the crew does NOT deviate thus forcing the company to pay the higher fare.
Then the you must show this documentation and get the accepted fare raised for the whole crew.
If no one actually deviates, the accepted fare remains unchanged, even though the company knows they cannot get a ticket back to MEM for that amount.
Therefore........now (for the last year +) they are NOT doing it this way.....and if you deviate.......it is as FDXLAG states........you only get the lower accepted fare - no matter who else on the same crew/trip does the scheduled DH or how much the actual scheduled DH costs.
We need to fix this in the next contract - but this is just a very MINOR issue in the big scheme of all that needs to be fixed in the next contract - we've got a LOT bigger fish to fry.
01-31-2008, 01:33 PM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
Originally Posted by AFW_MD11
We need to fix this in the next contract - but this is just a very MINOR issue in the big scheme of all that needs to be fixed in the next contract - we've got a LOT bigger fish to fry.
How do they define accepted fares?
How can the union track accepted fares being calculated correctly as opposed to being pulled out of thin air?
How are accepted fares adjusted higher when airlines raise fares unexpectedly? Easy answer here, they don't!
What is your wish list? Mine has accepted fares near the top because it is easy to fix but is always forgotten. Get the easy stuff done first then hammer out the tough stuff.
01-31-2008, 01:40 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: MD11 Capt
Posts: 152
Originally Posted by PicklePausePull
First order of business is remove ALPA!
Then we can work on repairing all the damage done by DW and the ALPA "reps."
Then we can work on repairing all the damage done by DW and the ALPA "reps."
01-31-2008, 01:52 PM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Originally Posted by Gunter
Minor issue, but it should be easy to fix. It is insulting the way it is done now and follows no rules identifiable by us.
How do they define accepted fares?
How can the union track accepted fares being calculated correctly as opposed to being pulled out of thin air?
How are accepted fares adjusted higher when airlines raise fares unexpectedly? Easy answer here, they don't!
What is your wish list? Mine has accepted fares near the top because it is easy to fix but is always forgotten. Get the easy stuff done first then hammer out the tough stuff.
How do they define accepted fares?
How can the union track accepted fares being calculated correctly as opposed to being pulled out of thin air?
How are accepted fares adjusted higher when airlines raise fares unexpectedly? Easy answer here, they don't!
What is your wish list? Mine has accepted fares near the top because it is easy to fix but is always forgotten. Get the easy stuff done first then hammer out the tough stuff.
DT is wrong this is a FOX problem. But you can't tell him anything.
01-31-2008, 01:56 PM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
Originally Posted by FDXLAG
To me this a problem that should not need fixing; the contract says your bank will be the higher of accepted fare or scheduled ticket. If we can't enforce this language what difference does any contract improvement make. Click on the link in my previous post, it takes you to a still active FEDEX help page that says you get the higher of accepted fare or scheduled fare.
DT is wrong this is a FOX problem. But you can't tell him anything.
DT is wrong this is a FOX problem. But you can't tell him anything.
01-31-2008, 02:05 PM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Drinking from the fire hose
Posts: 305
Originally Posted by Gunter
Fix substitution? Sounds like mafia lingo for a hit. What do you want to fix?
01-31-2008, 02:36 PM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Originally Posted by Micro
It does need a "hit". But the way substitution now works makes it too easy for the company to CX trips and turn you into a "reserve" pilot. Their should be a penalty for substituting you and either they have something for you immediately or you're done. None of this hanging on for 4 hours or longer if you trip is a longer TAFB. It was a "big" item to be fixed in the last negotiations but it seems that BC let it go the way of all the other work rule "improvements" (he did nothing).
Good point, include trip revisions in the substitution rules. Remember the ice storms where they keep you sitting around the hub way past the sub window then revise the trip into basically a substitution. Not saying they shouldn't have flexibility but, for their own sake, they need guidlines.
01-31-2008, 02:38 PM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Originally Posted by Gunter
Easy answer then. Grieve it. And don't let DT talk you out of it. A grievance is a lot work for him and he is spring loaded to tell you it won't make a difference.
I'll make another run at it, he held me off last time with the excuse of "secret discussions" underway.
01-31-2008, 02:39 PM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: MD11 FO, ANC
Posts: 1,098
Originally Posted by Gunter
What is your wish list? Mine has accepted fares near the top because it is easy to fix but is always forgotten. Get the easy stuff done first then hammer out the tough stuff.
Where do I begin?? My list (in no particular order) would be:
- Trip trade with open time - real time/no human/instantaneous results
- Limits on the optimizer - (don't know how exactly, but somehow limit the company's ability to unilaterally increase the pain)
- New-hire pay rates increased
- NO CHANGES TO RETIREMENT (ie. no penalty for retiring at 60 yrs, don't give up any of the A or B-fund)
- More company matching 401K contributions (more than $500/year)
- True seniority in the building of VTO lines process
- Hard time trips (block hours) paid on a leg-for-leg basis (not add up all the legs for the entire trip where underflying one leg cancels out overflying another)
- Adequate rest facilities (clearly defined) and required at all stations
- Deviation bank indefinite/unlimited rollover (month-to-month)
- Scrap/Re-do FDA LOA for each Foreign Domicile individually - and have union actually do some due diligence this time
- Training conflicts - paid (like vacation conflicts)
I could go on......maybe for a long, long time......
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
