UPS Displacement rumor
04-10-2008, 11:48 PM
#21
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: MD-11 F/O
Posts: 30
[QUOTE=SaltyDog;360749]
Brownguy,
Company didn't screw up. It was not a "bone" for us, It was intentional violation of the CBA and they are not interested in throwing you or I a "bone" but giving us the bone. They have blundered and were trying to cover some of the numbers up to demonstrate how cost effective this displacement is for UPS.
Certainly you don't want nor expect ourselves to allow the company to violate our only protections? Your frustrated. We all are frustrated with this exercise. Remember, the EB recommended and demonstrated a way to leave you,me and these five folks alone on our current seat. Call over to the 'IPA' and get the details from whomever. PM me if you want for more specific info. These five fellow IPA'ers were going to training somewhere, now like me, will ultimately train twice. Many folks have spent numerous cycles in the schoolhouse. It demonstrates the poor planning and wasted cost by UPS. This is old news for them. Sadly, You will get used to this pattern by UPS. At least we all have a seat though.
This waste and havoc created in your life is the complete responsibility of UPS. The silver lining for UPS is the hope you blame your own group and despise the senior folks. What a gift. Part of the divide and conquer plan. Don't fall for it. UPS always look for opportunity to divide us.
Thanks for the info Salty...I'm learning as I go along...damn this is confusing. I definately did not mean to call anybody out and I've been MORE THAN happy with our union to this point. I was just calling it as I saw it and wanted to hear from people like yourself as to your opinions. Thanks again.
Originally Posted by Brownguy
Brownguy,
Company didn't screw up. It was not a "bone" for us, It was intentional violation of the CBA and they are not interested in throwing you or I a "bone" but giving us the bone. They have blundered and were trying to cover some of the numbers up to demonstrate how cost effective this displacement is for UPS.
Certainly you don't want nor expect ourselves to allow the company to violate our only protections? Your frustrated. We all are frustrated with this exercise. Remember, the EB recommended and demonstrated a way to leave you,me and these five folks alone on our current seat. Call over to the 'IPA' and get the details from whomever. PM me if you want for more specific info. These five fellow IPA'ers were going to training somewhere, now like me, will ultimately train twice. Many folks have spent numerous cycles in the schoolhouse. It demonstrates the poor planning and wasted cost by UPS. This is old news for them. Sadly, You will get used to this pattern by UPS. At least we all have a seat though.
This waste and havoc created in your life is the complete responsibility of UPS. The silver lining for UPS is the hope you blame your own group and despise the senior folks. What a gift. Part of the divide and conquer plan. Don't fall for it. UPS always look for opportunity to divide us.
04-10-2008, 11:53 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: Leftof longitudinal
Posts: 1,899
Originally Posted by ⌐ AV8OR WANNABE
[I]
I agree, I must say it's funny how this "contract violation" was so critical to the union? Also, a -400 FO who will probably be displaced in the near future told me the other day that he thought it was amazing how quickly the new agreement was signed once the over 60 guys started trickling into the ANC domicile. In the recent past, all the junior guys kept complaining about not having the same ANC benefits as the MD pilots when it came to moving, reserve call out, pay package, etc. The union kept saying they were working on it but months went by and nothing happened.
Then the over 60 guys started trickling back into the ANC domicile and boom, the letter of agreement was signed with the company on giving MD and -400 guys the very same benefits.
Maybe it's a coincidence I don't know, maybe it just took them that long and they finally found a common ground at about the same time the new law was signed. Or maybe he’s correct when he cited the much less known Newton’s 5th law: “the speed of solving a problem between the union and the company is inversely proportional to the pilots’ seniority.”
I agree, I must say it's funny how this "contract violation" was so critical to the union? Also, a -400 FO who will probably be displaced in the near future told me the other day that he thought it was amazing how quickly the new agreement was signed once the over 60 guys started trickling into the ANC domicile. In the recent past, all the junior guys kept complaining about not having the same ANC benefits as the MD pilots when it came to moving, reserve call out, pay package, etc. The union kept saying they were working on it but months went by and nothing happened.
Then the over 60 guys started trickling back into the ANC domicile and boom, the letter of agreement was signed with the company on giving MD and -400 guys the very same benefits.
Maybe it's a coincidence I don't know, maybe it just took them that long and they finally found a common ground at about the same time the new law was signed. Or maybe he’s correct when he cited the much less known Newton’s 5th law: “the speed of solving a problem between the union and the company is inversely proportional to the pilots’ seniority.”
, Me to you = union. Hopefully, you will come to appreciate that long term, any violation of the contract is bad for all of us 'union'. If we don't defend the CBA, then we might as well be non union. UPS is very smart when it comes to dividing the pilot group. I have no idea why they finally released the new ANC letter, but 'we' have been working the issue for an awful long time within your/our IPA. But, again, if it causes angst in the union, it is gravy to UPS.
04-11-2008, 12:01 AM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: Leftof longitudinal
Posts: 1,899
Originally Posted by Nomad419
The situation now is basicly the same. We have guys, such as myself, getting displaced/reassigned to FE while others who are junior them are still FOs. I think that of the 35 of us displaced/reassigned to FE only 2 or 3 had FE on their system preference above the ANC FO positions. That second year pay you speak of is rapidly approaching and it is going to cost me and the other "new FEs" about $30K a year. A little pay protection would be a very welcome development in this unpleasant situation.
04-11-2008, 12:06 AM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: Leftof longitudinal
Posts: 1,899
[QUOTE=Brownguy;360751]
It is way confusing, 
I'll inquire why a new list hasn't been released. Good point!
Originally Posted by SaltyDog
Thanks for the info Salty...I'm learning as I go along...damn this is confusing. I definately did not mean to call anybody out and I've been MORE THAN happy with our union to this point. I was just calling it as I saw it and wanted to hear from people like yourself as to your opinions. Thanks again.
I'll inquire why a new list hasn't been released. Good point!
04-11-2008, 04:25 AM
#26
Banned
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 540
Originally Posted by Nomad419
The situation now is basicly the same. We have guys, such as myself, getting displaced/reassigned to FE while others who are junior them are still FOs. I think that of the 35 of us displaced/reassigned to FE only 2 or 3 had FE on their system preference above the ANC FO positions. That second year pay you speak of is rapidly approaching and it is going to cost me and the other "new FEs" about $30K a year. A little pay protection would be a very welcome development in this unpleasant situation.
The contract is written, negotiated, and enforced by the senior folks. When trying to figure this type of stuff out look at it from their perspective. Ask yourself "Is it good for me and the JR folks" then hooray for everyone. "Is it good for me (senior folks) then hooray for me". An example would be the grandfathering of the over 60 crowd vice having a cutoff date. What was the age of the FedEx guy who negotiated that? Was it good for the majority or the minority? While I'm sure to take some hits on this it doesn't change the facts. It is one of the few downsides to the organization known as a union. When folks write the contract they do so based on experience. That experience usually goes back to the last contract or what ever ticked them off most by it. The nuances of getting shat upon at the bottom of the seniority pile is lost or covered by "you will spend more time further up the list during your career so suck it up". How many folks with under two years on the property are involved in that process?
I'm previous UAL so could probably write a masters thesis on being sold out by both the company and UAL ALPA.
Biff
Last edited by bifff15; 04-11-2008 at 10:31 AM.
04-11-2008, 04:48 AM
#27
Tri-tanic operator
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Doggie
Posts: 2,382
Originally Posted by Brownguy
Yeah, wonderful...the company screwed up and let a few guys stay in the F/O seat. Good thing the IPA stepped up and called 'em out. Maybe, the IPA was thinking that the company would give those slots to 10 over 60's...but I don't think that happened. Instead, those 10 guys caught f'd right back to the panel...and you wonder why the company said "ok"? Ask these poor guys that are going back to training how they feel about the union stepping up?? Or ask ANY crewmember for that matter. WE JUST LOST 10 F/O POSITIONS. I don't understand it. I understand that we must be contractual, but when the company throws us a bone, do we call them out?
Don't mean to **** people off here and maybe I'm saying too much, or maybe I don't know the real story, but shoot, looks to me like we gave away F/O positions...or better yet MADE the company take them away.
correct me if I'm wrong...I hope I am.
Don't mean to **** people off here and maybe I'm saying too much, or maybe I don't know the real story, but shoot, looks to me like we gave away F/O positions...or better yet MADE the company take them away.
correct me if I'm wrong...I hope I am.
As you may now understand. Even if the company was giving us FO positions, those positions were not put up for bid for ALL crewmembers ...
They were hidden or overlooked, or ignored ... but you cannot place a displaced pilot where it is convenient, without further displacing ... or there was a vacancy there originally.
Clear as mud ...
Later,
Brown CC
Last edited by CactusCrew; 04-11-2008 at 05:28 AM.
04-11-2008, 06:07 AM
#28
On Reserve
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 10
Originally Posted by SaltyDog
. Please remember, the EB presented a plan to leave you in seat and still meet the needs of their business plan. UPS ignored the recommendation. UPS is causing our frustration. Not your IPA
04-11-2008, 06:09 AM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: Brown
Posts: 1,126
The Major League Baseball Players Association is a union made up of the players. That union's purpose is the same as any other labor union's purpose. However, instead of having an active player as the head of the union they hire outside help. Their reasoning is that a player is best suited to field grounders, lay a suicide squeeze, and steal second. They acknowledge that players are not equipped to be in a board room negotiating million dollar deals with the owners and the owner's reps. Consequently, they pay Donald Fehr, a lawyer, to be the executive director of the MLBPA.
I am certain Bob Miller is an excellent pilot. As an aviator he has years of experience and as an airline pilot he does have insight on many things. But it is ridiculous to use our money to pay him or any other pilot to represent the union. When he drops trips for union business the IPA pays the difference.
I want someone with a law degree and experience in labor law representing my union to UPS. Donald Fehr's sole job responsibility since 1986 has been in his current position. Why don't we do the same thing? We pay the IPA president and VP well over 500k a year in the form of trip drops. I know we could get an excellent labor person to represent the union and EB for that money. It seems to me that the EB could express the unique positions of the union to a "Donald Fehr" type executive director of the IPA and pay him to fight with UPS. That would level the playing field with UPS as it is just not possible to have a profesional pilot with the same skill set as UPS's labor folks.
Any thoughts or comments on why the IPA or ALPA have never done this?
I am certain Bob Miller is an excellent pilot. As an aviator he has years of experience and as an airline pilot he does have insight on many things. But it is ridiculous to use our money to pay him or any other pilot to represent the union. When he drops trips for union business the IPA pays the difference.
I want someone with a law degree and experience in labor law representing my union to UPS. Donald Fehr's sole job responsibility since 1986 has been in his current position. Why don't we do the same thing? We pay the IPA president and VP well over 500k a year in the form of trip drops. I know we could get an excellent labor person to represent the union and EB for that money. It seems to me that the EB could express the unique positions of the union to a "Donald Fehr" type executive director of the IPA and pay him to fight with UPS. That would level the playing field with UPS as it is just not possible to have a profesional pilot with the same skill set as UPS's labor folks.
Any thoughts or comments on why the IPA or ALPA have never done this?
04-11-2008, 07:20 AM
#30
Banned
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 540
Originally Posted by L'il J.Seinfeld
Any thoughts or comments on why the IPA or ALPA have never done this?
I like the way you think. It would appear that circumstances should be directing us toward that end.
To answer your question look further up your post where numbers are quoted as to how much the EB / MC's are paid to drop trips to do work for the pilot group. You will find the answer there.
If you want to see the mettle of a person, don't give them adversity, give them power.
Biff
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
