FDX 777 Bid
11-18-2008 | 04:26 AM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,047
Likes: 0
From: 767 FO
In the event of a excess bid, the HKG CA passover pay option is likely to still be available to a lot of people, just as it was in 08-03 before it was canceled.
For example, any of the MEM Bus Captains excessed out of their position who are senior to AS and too junior to hold -11 CA (which would likely be all of them), can bid HKG CA @ 100% to retain their widebody CA pay rate. To mitigate that, the company would have to put the "1" in the HKG CA slot and flush out half the people already there, and they seem(ed) reluctant to excess out of an FDA, especially captains who are already there.
In any case, I have my fingers crossed for a tiny to zip-sized excess bid.
For example, any of the MEM Bus Captains excessed out of their position who are senior to AS and too junior to hold -11 CA (which would likely be all of them), can bid HKG CA @ 100% to retain their widebody CA pay rate. To mitigate that, the company would have to put the "1" in the HKG CA slot and flush out half the people already there, and they seem(ed) reluctant to excess out of an FDA, especially captains who are already there.
In any case, I have my fingers crossed for a tiny to zip-sized excess bid.
24.C.6.c If an excessed pilot is awarded or assigned a crew position that is also in excess, the number of pilots to be excessed from that crew position may be increased accordingly; provided, however, no pilot may be awarded or assigned a crew position at an FDA base that would cause an excess at that base.
You can increase manning into an FDA or you can excess out of an FDA but you cant excess and put new people in.
11-18-2008 | 05:36 AM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
From: 767 Trunk Monkey
Doesnt make any sense to me for FedEx to buy your house in ANC and give you a move pkg and buy a Mem FO's house to move to ANC just to make 450 FE's like the last bid. And even if the only excess is the Airbus what if a good percentage of Airbus FO's bid ANC?
Not to mention HKG passover pay.
Will be a strange bid.
Not to mention HKG passover pay.
Will be a strange bid.
Shhhhh---don't mess this one up! "Great news, honey, FedEx is gonna buy our house--now start looking for a place in Anchorage--Dad's gonna fish all summer for salmon, instead of catfish!"
11-18-2008 | 06:04 AM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
So if this bid closes and is filled without a pay rate, I would love to see an LOA setting the pay rate at narrow body pay for four years (that's age sixty-one + 4, if you get my drift). In trade for this LOA, all other aircraft will get a small pay rate increase. ... insert cute smiley face of your choice.
11-18-2008 | 06:40 AM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
From: Row well and live...
11-18-2008 | 07:16 AM
#26
Living the dream!
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 915
Likes: 0
From: MD-11 Capt
11-18-2008 | 09:08 AM
#27
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
From: 777 CA
Can't flush out of a FDA:
24.C.6.c If an excessed pilot is awarded or assigned a crew position that is also in excess, the number of pilots to be excessed from that crew position may be increased accordingly; provided, however, no pilot may be awarded or assigned a crew position at an FDA base that would cause an excess at that base.
You can increase manning into an FDA or you can excess out of an FDA but you cant excess and put new people in.
24.C.6.c If an excessed pilot is awarded or assigned a crew position that is also in excess, the number of pilots to be excessed from that crew position may be increased accordingly; provided, however, no pilot may be awarded or assigned a crew position at an FDA base that would cause an excess at that base.
You can increase manning into an FDA or you can excess out of an FDA but you cant excess and put new people in.
This is what they did in 08-03. All that language does is protect FDA based pilots from a secondary excess where no excess previously existed. By building in an excess, with the "1", they have found a loophole in the language that gives them a pseudo bump n' flush...
At least this is my understanding from the last excess attempt ....
Last edited by livindadream; 11-18-2008 at 09:15 AM.
11-18-2008 | 09:22 AM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
From: 767 Trunk Monkey
11-18-2008 | 09:38 AM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,642
Likes: 0
From: A300/310 Capt
This is exactly why they place the "1" in every position. By placing it in an FDA, an excess already exists. Therefore excessing into the FDA does not "cause" the excess. It already existed... Then, IAW the CBA, the "number of pilots to be excessed from that crew position may be increased accordingly".
This is what they did in 08-03. All that language does is protect FDA based pilots from a secondary excess where no excess previously existed. By building in an excess, with the "1", they have found a loophole in the language that gives them a pseudo bump n' flush...
At least this is my understanding from the last excess attempt ....
This is what they did in 08-03. All that language does is protect FDA based pilots from a secondary excess where no excess previously existed. By building in an excess, with the "1", they have found a loophole in the language that gives them a pseudo bump n' flush...
At least this is my understanding from the last excess attempt ....
11-18-2008 | 09:41 AM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,098
Likes: 0
From: MD11 FO, ANC
This is exactly why they place the "1" in every position. By placing it in an FDA, an excess already exists. Therefore excessing into the FDA does not "cause" the excess. It already existed... Then, IAW the CBA, the "number of pilots to be excessed from that crew position may be increased accordingly".
This is what they did in 08-03. All that language does is protect FDA based pilots from a secondary excess where no excess previously existed. By building in an excess, with the "1", they have found a loophole in the language that gives them a pseudo bump n' flush...
At least this is my understanding from the last excess attempt ....
This is what they did in 08-03. All that language does is protect FDA based pilots from a secondary excess where no excess previously existed. By building in an excess, with the "1", they have found a loophole in the language that gives them a pseudo bump n' flush...
At least this is my understanding from the last excess attempt ....
in fact, those bid statuses and the MEM 727 S/O were the only ones in the system that didn't have at least a "1" excess in that bid.
so.........thus far, the company has left the Airbus passover pay option on the table. it'll be interesting to see what they do "after peak"
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
