FDX MEC Leadership change
06-04-2008, 04:37 AM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: 777 Multi-tasker
Posts: 712
FDX MEC Leadership change
Any truth to the rumors of people going to "dues checkoff" until there is new leadership in the #1 position of the MEC?
The right message? Wrong time?
How much longer do we have with this guy?
The right message? Wrong time?
How much longer do we have with this guy?
06-04-2008, 06:01 AM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: 777 Multi-tasker
Posts: 712
Probably, but the question I was asked during this topic discussion was how do we send a message to the MEC leadership that we're not happy with him... I mean them.
The standard block rep answer doesn't seem to work.
The standard block rep answer doesn't seem to work.
06-04-2008, 07:02 AM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 2,889
All your MEC officer terms expire next summer. The current chairman indicates he will not run again. The MEC block reps will vote (I think in the spring--forgive me I'm still new...) on the new officers.
You do not get to vote directly for these positions as members. However, you can certainly make your input known. I know there is a certain feeling that your input doesn't matter, but if you are in my block or LEC I will of course take your input and use that in the decision process.
Currently we are discussing getting out and doing more meetings with the membership, and informing everyone about the process and encouraging your involvement will be part of what I want to do. I will certainly discuss this over lunch with folks anytime you want...
You do not get to vote directly for these positions as members. However, you can certainly make your input known. I know there is a certain feeling that your input doesn't matter, but if you are in my block or LEC I will of course take your input and use that in the decision process.
Currently we are discussing getting out and doing more meetings with the membership, and informing everyone about the process and encouraging your involvement will be part of what I want to do. I will certainly discuss this over lunch with folks anytime you want...
06-04-2008, 08:23 AM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: 777 Multi-tasker
Posts: 712
Originally Posted by Albief15
All your MEC officer terms expire next summer. The current chairman indicates he will not run again. The MEC block reps will vote (I think in the spring--forgive me I'm still new...) on the new officers.
You do not get to vote directly for these positions as members. However, you can certainly make your input known. I know there is a certain feeling that your input doesn't matter, but if you are in my block or LEC I will of course take your input and use that in the decision process.
Currently we are discussing getting out and doing more meetings with the membership, and informing everyone about the process and encouraging your involvement will be part of what I want to do. I will certainly discuss this over lunch with folks anytime you want...
You do not get to vote directly for these positions as members. However, you can certainly make your input known. I know there is a certain feeling that your input doesn't matter, but if you are in my block or LEC I will of course take your input and use that in the decision process.
Currently we are discussing getting out and doing more meetings with the membership, and informing everyone about the process and encouraging your involvement will be part of what I want to do. I will certainly discuss this over lunch with folks anytime you want...
06-04-2008, 11:04 AM
#6
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 68
Albie, I would like him removed prior to next summer. He used our dues money to cause our pilot group to fracture. He does not deserve to be allowed to step down! The return on our dues investment demands his removal, not retirement.
Second, DW should allow SS and JA to approach the company with a buy out package.
Third, management needs to consider no training after 60 as the ICAO rule intended. If you are 59.8, then your current seat is your seat until you are 65. If you are over 60 and want to return to the cockpit, passover pay for the seat your seniority holds and you stay put. If your seat goes away, welcome to the training department. These are the most experienced guys, why not let all of us grain from their experience twice a year and during upgrade? No re-training costs, passover for over 60 and experience gained by all in the SIM. Also, an added benefit for the over 60 crowed, prolonged life by reducing the demands of flying all the time. Maybe we could all live to see 68. I suspect it is not about the money as you indicated earlier, Albie. I am sure it is about ego and wanting to have a window seat back. Selfish attitude that is only hurting our company and dividing the pilots.
Fourth, with 700m write down for FedEx Kinkos rebrand to FedEx office and tax bill of up to 300m per year for 2004-2007, FedEx is looking to save money. This is the prefect time to DW to "do the right thing" and try and fix the situation he created.
Remove him or "make him do the right thing"
Second, DW should allow SS and JA to approach the company with a buy out package.
Third, management needs to consider no training after 60 as the ICAO rule intended. If you are 59.8, then your current seat is your seat until you are 65. If you are over 60 and want to return to the cockpit, passover pay for the seat your seniority holds and you stay put. If your seat goes away, welcome to the training department. These are the most experienced guys, why not let all of us grain from their experience twice a year and during upgrade? No re-training costs, passover for over 60 and experience gained by all in the SIM. Also, an added benefit for the over 60 crowed, prolonged life by reducing the demands of flying all the time. Maybe we could all live to see 68. I suspect it is not about the money as you indicated earlier, Albie. I am sure it is about ego and wanting to have a window seat back. Selfish attitude that is only hurting our company and dividing the pilots.
Fourth, with 700m write down for FedEx Kinkos rebrand to FedEx office and tax bill of up to 300m per year for 2004-2007, FedEx is looking to save money. This is the prefect time to DW to "do the right thing" and try and fix the situation he created.
Remove him or "make him do the right thing"
Last edited by Delco92; 06-04-2008 at 11:10 AM. Reason: typos
06-04-2008, 11:29 AM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: 777 Multi-tasker
Posts: 712
Originally Posted by Delco92
Albie, I would like him removed prior to next summer. He used our dues money to cause our pilot group to fracture. He does not deserve to be allowed to step down! The return on our dues investment demands his removal, not retirement.
Second, DW should allow SS and JA to approach the company with a buy out package.
Third, management needs to consider no training after 60 as the ICAO rule intended. If you are 59.8, then your current seat is your seat until you are 65. If you are over 60 and want to return to the cockpit, passover pay for the seat your seniority holds and you stay put. If your seat goes away, welcome to the training department. These are the most experienced guys, why not let all of us grain from their experience twice a year and during upgrade? No re-training costs, passover for over 60 and experience gained by all in the SIM. Also, an added benefit for the over 60 crowed, prolonged life by reducing the demands of flying all the time. Maybe we could all live to see 68. I suspect it is not about the money as you indicated earlier, Albie. I am sure it is about ego and wanting to have a window seat back. Selfish attitude that is only hurting our company and dividing the pilots.
Fourth, with 700m write down for FedEx Kinkos rebrand to FedEx office and tax bill of up to 300m per year for 2004-2007, FedEx is looking to save money. This is the prefect time to DW to "do the right thing" and try and fix the situation he created.
Remove him or "make him do the right thing"
Second, DW should allow SS and JA to approach the company with a buy out package.
Third, management needs to consider no training after 60 as the ICAO rule intended. If you are 59.8, then your current seat is your seat until you are 65. If you are over 60 and want to return to the cockpit, passover pay for the seat your seniority holds and you stay put. If your seat goes away, welcome to the training department. These are the most experienced guys, why not let all of us grain from their experience twice a year and during upgrade? No re-training costs, passover for over 60 and experience gained by all in the SIM. Also, an added benefit for the over 60 crowed, prolonged life by reducing the demands of flying all the time. Maybe we could all live to see 68. I suspect it is not about the money as you indicated earlier, Albie. I am sure it is about ego and wanting to have a window seat back. Selfish attitude that is only hurting our company and dividing the pilots.
Fourth, with 700m write down for FedEx Kinkos rebrand to FedEx office and tax bill of up to 300m per year for 2004-2007, FedEx is looking to save money. This is the prefect time to DW to "do the right thing" and try and fix the situation he created.
Remove him or "make him do the right thing"
Makes sense to me.... why let him exit as MEC Chairman.. why not exit as recalled MEC Chairman. Keep's the chances of a national reward down.
06-04-2008, 12:42 PM
#9
Slainge Var'
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Zeppelin Tail Gunner
Posts: 1,530
Originally Posted by hschol
DW doesn't know what the right thing is, if he did he lost sight of it a long time ago.
06-04-2008, 12:55 PM
#10
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2005
Position: FO
Posts: 104
True but I think he can influence things a little more than that. He has run his course and done a lot of good, which now is being overshadowed by some poor, painful decisions of recent. I think there is a time to bow out gracefully. He needs to do it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
