MEMFO4Ever

Yes. It is the definition of seniority here at FedEx. Been that way a long time and hasn't changed.

TheBaron

I'll type slow so you can keep up.

It is OK for the company to build lines with c/o because it IS in our CBA; not because they have always done it. Make changing that a cornerstone of our next negotiations if you feel strongly about it.

It is NOT OK for the company to arbitrarily invoke section 4.A.2.b when they are clearly not in a position to furlough and I wholeheartedly agree with the MEC filing a grievance on the matter.

The company WON'T build 200 additional lines, even if all 12000 hours of c/o is protected (which can't be done.) Reserve and VTO will just get to fly more/ sit less.

Now if someone on the SIG/PSIT can show that c/o has suddenly jumped above historic levels, then we may be able to use that as evidence that the company has artificially manufactured this entire over-manning situation to illegally reduce our MBLG.

Gunter

You can define seniority anyway you want. Low end has always been respected.

Things have changed around here. Read the SIG letter, look at the FDA LOA, look at the old guy sitting next to you, look at 4a2b. What will change next?

I wouldn't count on anything just because it's been that way for a long time.

Eaglebeak

Question #1. I read the email.

Question #2. No, everybody is equal and everybody should make exactly the same amount of money. We should furlough from the top down. Anyone over 60 should be terminated by the government. Senior guys should give up all they have worked for so that junior guys will be better off. I voted for Obama because I am a socialist. I enjoy paying huge taxes so that people who don't work or pay any taxes can get a refund. NOT EXACTLY!

SERIOUSLY! I think that the extra hours that "can" be flown by those "senior" enough to pull it off "would" have been flown by someone on a VTO anyway. I don't believe guys flying or protecting carryover is going to or has had a causal effect on the reduction of hours in the lines......Unless..

....The Union can negotiate that carryover be minimized to the extent possible and converted into additional lines and lines that pay the MBLG. They tried that and it didn't work. The company is the villan here--not your fellow pilots who may or may not use their seniority to mitigate financial hardship. The company has used a clause in the contract to build lines below our MBLG and only pay us the reduced amount. They have no intention of furloughing and I seriously doubt they are that overmanned, especially in the MD-11 (at least the numbers previously discussed seem to indicate that).

Guys have been flying carryover and protecting it for as long as I have been here and guys have been complaining about those that do. If you don't want to do it or can't because you aren't senior enough, then pay your dues and get senior enough or don't do it if you don't want to. Better yet, lobby your union to eliminate as much of it as possible in our next contract.

I just hate it when I here guys generalize, stereotype, and judge others. Everyone's circumstances are different. I have met the enemy and they ain't us.

I really don't care if someone flys all they can because what they do isn't making my situation any worse (in this current situation) and I don't know what their personal or financial situation is, i.e., one or more children in college, care givers for elderly parents, spouse with cancer/other, catastopic loss, etc., etc.

Me personally--I haven't flown but one 15 day trip since early Oct. I used a Nov carryover trip to knock out the whole month of Dec. I took a pretty good hit in pay but know I can make it up. Now after putting 80+ hours back into the system for Dec, I am going to be called a jerk for flying extra. My next two trips are RFO trips because they are real good trips with minimum legs, long layovers, and DHs. Are you mad at me because my seniority allows me to fly those trips too. And, one more thing. I may fly some extra to get my landings because I don't want to go non current.

I passed up widebody captain pay about 4 years ago so that I could get real senior in my seat, fly good trips, when I want to fly them, get my vacation when I want it, take as much as a month off without using vacation by knocking trips out with carryover, flying extra and doubling up in some months to make up the difference, or stuff my 401K, or pay tuition, etc. The alternative for me was being junior, making 50 bucks an hour more, but having to have a crash pad and a car in Memphis, fly crappy trips at crappy times, and basically have no control. I'm going at 60 too!!

I planned for this. I was junior. I've had a crash pad and an airport car. I voted against every contract. I haven't ever flown a disputed paring but know those who have. I haven't flown a draft or volunteer trip in at least 5 years (I can't remember) but know those who have. I didn't fly make-up or sell back vacation during contract negotiations but know those who have.

Everyone should tighten their belts. Everyone should provide for their families as best they can. This isn't fair. Life isn't fair. Some are more fortunate than others. Some have better timing than others. Some are older that others. Some are senior to others. We are lucky morter forkers to have these jobs. We don't need to start calling everyone out and using class warfare among ourselves.

Bottom line--We ain't that overmanned. They ain't gonna furlough.

Gunter

I'm glad you changed your story from "this is how we have always done it" to "its in the CBA" Good start.

I see where you are confused. Historic levels of C/O mean nothing when 4a2b is in play. Nevermind that historic levels of carryover are not being respected in the Bus and Boeing. But is in the MD11. Oh, wait, only MEM and ANC. LAX isn't at historical levels either.

Historically the company has followed the contract and paid 68/85.
Historically the company has not played funny games with accepted fares and claimed computer errors as they try to save a few bucks.
Historically the company has undermanned the airline with draft/volunteer filling in the void during peak.

I don't this history is a good guide anymore. Do you?

Eaglebeak

Bingo! I agree!

TheBaron

Where do you see me changing my story? I simply said we have always had c/o; I didn't realize I had to explain to you the reason why (CBA.)

Do you have evidence of a sudden increase in c/o in the Airbus, Boeing, and LAX MD? That should be helpful to prove that the company is manipulating the schedule to support their claim of overmanning. I'm sure the MEC would be interested.

I now understand the logic behind what the MEC would like to see happen, thanks to an intelligently written PM I received. You, however, don't seem to exhibit the same clear thought process.


What exactly do you think will happen if no c/o is flown by the pilot group?
Are you really under the impression the company will build approx. 200 additional lines? I'm curious.

Gunter

C/O is lower in the Airbus, Boeing and LAX.

I'm glad someone was able to get thru to you.

You are coming in loud and clear and it is a disturbing message.

It's always been o.k. for the most senior to get their extra. But now, this extra pay is being subsidized by lower pay for the masses on the seniority list. No shared sacrifice. I know where you fall on this subject. You believe it is o.k. because we have always done it. Which is what you said before then changed to referring to the CBA. That IS an important distinction regardless of your opinion to the contrary.

Apparently that nice intelligent thought process will keep your investments growing. Good luck with that.


Let ME slow it down.

More lines would create a need for more bodies to fly those lines. That is what the company should do. You may be happy letting the company sodomize everyone for the benefit of the carryover crowd but I'm not.

MajorKong

Baron, I think the point people and the union are trying to make about C/O is this: If the company would change the bid month start to Sunday instead of Monday, it would eliminate most long C/O trips. Thus, putting them in the next months bid lines and increasing the amount of lines. VTO's are a percentage of regular bid lines. Most of VTO's are made up of vacation and training and very little CIC because most don't bid to conflict. They just fly the 110-130 hours per month. None of this has anything to do with how much reserves fly. Most reserve flights are extra pairings and sick calls.

TheBaron

Earlier you made it sound like there was some negative aspect of the c/o trend in the Bus, Boeing and LAX. Apparently you don't understand it at all. Decreasing c/o has the effect of increasing the average BLG (a good thing.) If c/o has dropped in the Boeing, Airbus, and LAX...that is a good thing for the average BLG's in those seats because the lines have to be built to include that former c/o flying or additional lines have to be built. So if what you say is true, the company is doing the right thing by decreasing c/o flying which is exactly what the union wants.

I can only guess you struggled in school since you can't answer a direct question. I'll try again.

If all 12000 hours of c/o are conflicted/protected, which part of the CBA to you propose requires the company to build additional lines as you suggest.