Re-elect LOA1? A case for considering a "YES" vote.
07-02-2008 | 01:53 PM
#161
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,409
Likes: 0
So you don't think the company should have included COLA in the LOA would that have created an unfair advantage for a particular pilot group?? If you think people are going to bid it and it ends up being a negative equity situation then you are crazy. The only guys who are bidding it are the ones who can hold Capt because of said pay raise. Come on dude if the company would have bucked up to begin with or the 68% would have actually read and voted down the LOA 1.0 maybe it would have been filled by now...
07-02-2008 | 04:35 PM
#162
Slainge Var'
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,530
Likes: 0
From: Zeppelin Tail Gunner
07-03-2008 | 06:22 AM
#164
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
I just think back to the security briefing guides that we got when we arrived in Subic years ago. I remember them specifically recommending that we do NOT take public transportation, under any circumstances. Avoid buses, trains, and ferrys. Only take taxi's from approved vendors, and never get in a cab if there is someone with the driver. Good common sense advise when living and working abroad. So why is it now ok to disregard that sound advice? Why did we have that protection in the first place? Perhaps because in today's world, there is the possibility of harm coming to people who ride public transportation. A big risk in Hong Kong and China? Maybe not. At this time. But who knows what the future holds. Not to mention having this protection taken away from us, and having, possibly train rides scheduled in Europe, or India? Attacks on trains are not all that uncommon in some of those places. Even Japan. Remember the serin attacks in Tokyo, not too long ago? Bombings in Spain? Ferrys sink in the South China and Philippine sea on a fairly regular basis. Bombs on buses, very common.
The provision to prevent crews from travelling on buses and trains was put there for a reason. To protect the crewmembers. Why give up that protection, just to help the company dig itself out of an ever increasing deep hole. If the 3 to 4 hour taxi ride is unsat, as is safe public transportation, then make it a deadhead domicile, and keep the crews on approved, safe, protected air transportation. Like we have always done.
Something to think about......for the long term.
And also a big no for the blank check to the MEC chair, whoever is sitting in it.
The provision to prevent crews from travelling on buses and trains was put there for a reason. To protect the crewmembers. Why give up that protection, just to help the company dig itself out of an ever increasing deep hole. If the 3 to 4 hour taxi ride is unsat, as is safe public transportation, then make it a deadhead domicile, and keep the crews on approved, safe, protected air transportation. Like we have always done.
Something to think about......for the long term.
And also a big no for the blank check to the MEC chair, whoever is sitting in it.
07-03-2008 | 10:00 AM
#165
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,409
Likes: 0
I just think back to the security briefing guides that we got when we arrived in Subic years ago. I remember them specifically recommending that we do NOT take public transportation, under any circumstances. Avoid buses, trains, and ferrys. Only take taxi's from approved vendors, and never get in a cab if there is someone with the driver. Good common sense advise when living and working abroad. So why is it now ok to disregard that sound advice? Why did we have that protection in the first place? Perhaps because in today's world, there is the possibility of harm coming to people who ride public transportation. A big risk in Hong Kong and China? Maybe not. At this time. But who knows what the future holds. Not to mention having this protection taken away from us, and having, possibly train rides scheduled in Europe, or India? Attacks on trains are not all that uncommon in some of those places. Even Japan. Remember the serin attacks in Tokyo, not too long ago? Bombings in Spain? Ferrys sink in the South China and Philippine sea on a fairly regular basis. Bombs on buses, very common.
The provision to prevent crews from travelling on buses and trains was put there for a reason. To protect the crewmembers. Why give up that protection, just to help the company dig itself out of an ever increasing deep hole. If the 3 to 4 hour taxi ride is unsat, as is safe public transportation, then make it a deadhead domicile, and keep the crews on approved, safe, protected air transportation. Like we have always done.
Something to think about......for the long term.
And also a big no for the blank check to the MEC chair, whoever is sitting in it.
The provision to prevent crews from travelling on buses and trains was put there for a reason. To protect the crewmembers. Why give up that protection, just to help the company dig itself out of an ever increasing deep hole. If the 3 to 4 hour taxi ride is unsat, as is safe public transportation, then make it a deadhead domicile, and keep the crews on approved, safe, protected air transportation. Like we have always done.
Something to think about......for the long term.
And also a big no for the blank check to the MEC chair, whoever is sitting in it.
07-03-2008 | 10:17 AM
#166
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
From: MD11
Re: the whole issue of FCIF enhancements:
The company didn't come back and "memorialize" the FCIF improvements via LOA II, they went for a bit of a grab. They didn't like the uncertainty of membership ratification (and neither did the MEC, IMO) so they wrote that out with para N. They wanted the flexibility to move crews by public transport vice them being responsible for it, so they tried to mask it as an improvement for the HK based crew in para G.
In doing so, they introduced two poison pills to the LOA...hoping that we'd bite anyway because it added some meager financial improvements for those poor souls who had already bit off on LOA I.
I'm not willing to surrender my voice in future LOAs, or submit to GT on busses at the company's option, just to throw a small financial bone to guys who got suckered in by that first, inadequate, offer.
The company didn't come back and "memorialize" the FCIF improvements via LOA II, they went for a bit of a grab. They didn't like the uncertainty of membership ratification (and neither did the MEC, IMO) so they wrote that out with para N. They wanted the flexibility to move crews by public transport vice them being responsible for it, so they tried to mask it as an improvement for the HK based crew in para G.
In doing so, they introduced two poison pills to the LOA...hoping that we'd bite anyway because it added some meager financial improvements for those poor souls who had already bit off on LOA I.
I'm not willing to surrender my voice in future LOAs, or submit to GT on busses at the company's option, just to throw a small financial bone to guys who got suckered in by that first, inadequate, offer.
07-03-2008 | 07:01 PM
#167
"blue collar thug"!
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,614
Likes: 0
From: A proponent of...
Quote:
Originally Posted by PicklePausePull
The pot will be sweet enough when it does not cost me money to move to a foregin domicile in order to help the company make money, and that includes providing adequate housing and education for my children. If the federal government can afford it, so can a multi-billion dollar fortune 100 company!
AA, I do agree with most of your posts. It is nice to have someone posting that sees through the BS...IMO. Having said that...
1. The LOA should be enough to entice almost anyone. The school thing is a biggy because in the US you have public schools at no cost, theoretically. Dont have that choice in HKG. Gonna cost big $$.
2. You are right about the counterfeit money printed by the Fed (not our government, the Fed, a private banking cartel). So when the $ continues to slide, no COLA will hurt those in HKG.
I think the main point is that if FedEx wants to go to China and make money, it shouldnt be at the expense of all of us pilots. STV, tax equal (debatable until we find out how it is REALLY going to work), are just two examples. We need to share in the spoils, so to speak.
Originally Posted by PicklePausePull
The pot will be sweet enough when it does not cost me money to move to a foregin domicile in order to help the company make money, and that includes providing adequate housing and education for my children. If the federal government can afford it, so can a multi-billion dollar fortune 100 company!
From this paragraph I deduce two things:
1) You think that the LOA should be large enough to entice any pilot, senority #1 to senority # 4700, to bid an FDA. Married, 6 kids, crazy aunt Millie in a wheel chair, family dog, 5 bedroom house full of furniture, 2 cars......the whole enchilada should go over gratis and into a house that you consider adequate for the team and at no out of pocket expense to the pilot. Private school should be provided free for the kids of anyone who can hold the FDA and chooses to bid it. Even though they only need 60 pilots in HKG, the package should be big enough to attract all 4700. (Hey, why not?)
2) You are unaware that the US Government prints it's own money.
1) You think that the LOA should be large enough to entice any pilot, senority #1 to senority # 4700, to bid an FDA. Married, 6 kids, crazy aunt Millie in a wheel chair, family dog, 5 bedroom house full of furniture, 2 cars......the whole enchilada should go over gratis and into a house that you consider adequate for the team and at no out of pocket expense to the pilot. Private school should be provided free for the kids of anyone who can hold the FDA and chooses to bid it. Even though they only need 60 pilots in HKG, the package should be big enough to attract all 4700. (Hey, why not?)
2) You are unaware that the US Government prints it's own money.
1. The LOA should be enough to entice almost anyone. The school thing is a biggy because in the US you have public schools at no cost, theoretically. Dont have that choice in HKG. Gonna cost big $$.
2. You are right about the counterfeit money printed by the Fed (not our government, the Fed, a private banking cartel). So when the $ continues to slide, no COLA will hurt those in HKG.
I think the main point is that if FedEx wants to go to China and make money, it shouldnt be at the expense of all of us pilots. STV, tax equal (debatable until we find out how it is REALLY going to work), are just two examples. We need to share in the spoils, so to speak.
07-03-2008 | 07:07 PM
#168
"blue collar thug"!
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,614
Likes: 0
From: A proponent of...
I do think COLA should have been included and I don't follow you. If everyone at a particular FDA received the same COLA, why do you think that would be unfair? BTW, jog my memory, how much tuition assistance do the guys at Subic get for their kids in the Brent International School?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
