5yr WBFO $137 plus override probably $160,000/yr vs 5yr NBSO $99 with reduced BLG probably $60,000/yr.....that's my only positive about HKG and the "specials" of course!!!

 

11777 views! Wow, I wonder who all is reading this stuff! Just a rhetorical question.

 

I found some one way fares from LAX as low as $340. (air Canada) for those tough enough for circadian issues it could be done. Wouldnt flying nights in CAN be about the same as day flying on MEM?

 

I was thinking the same thing, make everyone dual seat qualified! Make everyone a flex/LCA too!

 

Enough with the nickel & dime add-ons. With half the improvements posted via FCIF or e-mails, the Union and Company should fix this mule by taking a mulligan and re-submitting it to the membership for another vote. This would also mean a complete re-do of HKG bids. Everybody should have the same opportunity to bid HKG knowing all the facts and everyone should bid from the same level playing field. Crewmembers should not have to gamble on nickel and dime enhancements to the LOA; cobbled together at the last minute trying to 'buy' that last FO HKG bid at the lowest possible price.

It would be the right thing to do!

 

Gooch,

You are right on. Send this thing back and let's get it done correctly. As it stands right now, it blows!

Wildmanny

 

I couldnt agree more. The Company nickel and diming us defeats the purpose of our Union, or should I say the intent of the RLA. I dont think our MEC has a clue to their tactics. And if they do, it is time to look in the mirror and fess up. After that, they can do the right thing!

 

Exactly. I think it would be silly for a junior SO to bid 30FH under the current LOA and be stuck with it for the next five years. Much better to sit reserve in MEM and never get used (if you really need the money, you'll have plenty of time off to work a second job...)

However if you can get 30CH, that's a different story. You could possibly end up sitting reserve and collecting passover...

If the 30FH seats remain unfilled and the 30CH are overmanned we may have some serious leverage to fix this LOA once and for all.

SG

 

It's actually only the 49th most viewed Cargo thread.

 

Albie,

First, I have talked to RI about this about two weeks ago after he was through explaining why he added gas to standards. Therefore, I contend DW has to make a move. I am tried of sending nice letters to my union leadership. DW needs to act on this one. He continues to fracture this pilot group for 200 or so "Benevolent Senior Pilots" we must all praise for saving our jobs (MEC Chairman Message). He was wrong using our Union Funds to travel to Capitol Hill to lobby for something the majority of his members did not support. Now, DW needs to do the "right thing" and fix this overage by going to the company with a plan.

Second, I think PC and the company should act as well. PC could pursue a different route by making FDX fully compliant with ICAO. I know this means scheduling issues with two over 60s, but my understanding of the international age rule is no training after 60. Remember when ALPA sold of this package my saying "these guys are experts." Well, let's keep them in their seat of choice at 60. If they moved to the back of the 10 or 27 prior to rule change, save the cost of retraining them and pay passover to all of them and excess the airplane. Do the same with all those on the 10 regardless of seats. This will solve the overage and eliminate the excess. The pilots will sit and get paid anyway which is what you say the company is willing to do anyway. With sick usage, training costs, disability, vacation, and disability, I am sure it would be cheaper for FDX to let the Benevolent Senior Pilots collect passover without affecting our FDX reliability.

This could work but BOTH sides need to make a move together. This is something DW has said again and again he is not willing to do. I think he should make the move. I know the research is done. Please help him see the light.