FDX-FDA Bargaining
10-12-2010 | 06:40 AM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,876
Likes: 0
From: 767 CA
The way I see it, we have two bargaining chips in these negotiations. First, the new FDA in CGN and MD11s in HKG. Second is ULR rules for the 777.
We as a pilot group do not have to have an FDA in CGN. No one will be forced to go to HKG in the MD11 or fly 757 in CGN against his will. The company obviously desparately wants these. If we bargain with the company outside of Section 6 negotiations we have used one of two bargaining chips for just one small portion of our contract. Yes it would be nice to improve the conditions for the Airbus folks in HKG. But they bid it knowing what the current LOA said. They can wait a little longer for improvements.
The company is not going to offer these FDA improvements and then take them away just because we want them as part of the full contract negotiations. If they do, then that is their problem, not ours. Like I said, we as pilots don't have to have them. We may want them but don't need them. The flying over there is not going to go away.
Like FDXLAG asked, I sure would like to know the unions reasoning for an LOA rather than making it part of the whole deal.
We as a pilot group do not have to have an FDA in CGN. No one will be forced to go to HKG in the MD11 or fly 757 in CGN against his will. The company obviously desparately wants these. If we bargain with the company outside of Section 6 negotiations we have used one of two bargaining chips for just one small portion of our contract. Yes it would be nice to improve the conditions for the Airbus folks in HKG. But they bid it knowing what the current LOA said. They can wait a little longer for improvements.
The company is not going to offer these FDA improvements and then take them away just because we want them as part of the full contract negotiations. If they do, then that is their problem, not ours. Like I said, we as pilots don't have to have them. We may want them but don't need them. The flying over there is not going to go away.
Like FDXLAG asked, I sure would like to know the unions reasoning for an LOA rather than making it part of the whole deal.
10-12-2010 | 06:55 AM
#12
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 477
Likes: 4
From: Heavily Involved
We haven't yet seen this new document so it's difficult to speak about but ...
I'm generally in the ""put it in the new CBA" camp ... (as it might expedite negotiations if the company wants it bad enough!)
That said, it seems this "could" be good news. A vastly improved FDA LOA that addresses many of the issues we've raised on this forum might be a good thing for all of us. Also negotiating a new FDA LOA outside of contract negotiations could get us improvements that we don't have to "pay" for with other CBA section "give backs." I think I'm OK with the idea of a GOOD FDA LOA outside of negotiations (emphasis on GOOD).
We pay the MEC well to represent our interests and "sometimes" they have more information than we do. I say lets let them do their job, see what they bring us, make up our own minds and THEN act accordingly. I know I won't fall for the, "It's the best we are going to get so we should vote for it" advise from the MEC again (just for the record, I didn't fall for it last time).
I'm generally in the ""put it in the new CBA" camp ... (as it might expedite negotiations if the company wants it bad enough!)
That said, it seems this "could" be good news. A vastly improved FDA LOA that addresses many of the issues we've raised on this forum might be a good thing for all of us. Also negotiating a new FDA LOA outside of contract negotiations could get us improvements that we don't have to "pay" for with other CBA section "give backs." I think I'm OK with the idea of a GOOD FDA LOA outside of negotiations (emphasis on GOOD).
We pay the MEC well to represent our interests and "sometimes" they have more information than we do. I say lets let them do their job, see what they bring us, make up our own minds and THEN act accordingly. I know I won't fall for the, "It's the best we are going to get so we should vote for it" advise from the MEC again (just for the record, I didn't fall for it last time).
In a perfect world, I may tend to agree with your position. However, in light of the fleecing of the majority of us under 4a2b just a few months ago, excess bids that caused major economic hardship on many of us and our families, coupled with ongoing section 6 negotiations, I say let them pound salt.
You know, even if the proffered FDA LOA is a vast improvement, it likely will only affect 3% of the pilot group. What's the dam hurry? A successful FDA LOA is much more beneficial to the company than it is to US! Remember, if you don't LIKE the current LOA, DON'T BID IT! When the company CAN'T FILL THE BID, the WILL improve it on their own!
I am disappointed that the MEC is even discussing this outside of section 6 talks. Here we go again, giving in to management when if we would, just ONCE, hold our ground we might see great gains for ALL of us.
10-12-2010 | 07:24 AM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,047
Likes: 0
From: 767 FO
Just tell us who proposed using pistols?
Just sat through the SS video on negotiations (check your email). Competent guy.
I hope he tells us how a seperate LOA fits into the discussion of our plan vs the company plan and if he thinks that an FDA might fit the category of distraction.
I hope he tells us how a seperate LOA fits into the discussion of our plan vs the company plan and if he thinks that an FDA might fit the category of distraction.
10-12-2010 | 07:45 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,224
Likes: 0
Mark,
In a perfect world, I may tend to agree with your position. However, in light of the fleecing of the majority of us under 4a2b just a few months ago, excess bids that caused major economic hardship on many of us and our families, coupled with ongoing section 6 negotiations, I say let them pound salt.
You know, even if the proffered FDA LOA is a vast improvement, it likely will only affect 3% of the pilot group. What's the dam hurry? A successful FDA LOA is much more beneficial to the company than it is to US! Remember, if you don't LIKE the current LOA, DON'T BID IT! When the company CAN'T FILL THE BID, the WILL improve it on their own!
I am disappointed that the MEC is even discussing this outside of section 6 talks. Here we go again, giving in to management when if we would, just ONCE, hold our ground we might see great gains for ALL of us.
In a perfect world, I may tend to agree with your position. However, in light of the fleecing of the majority of us under 4a2b just a few months ago, excess bids that caused major economic hardship on many of us and our families, coupled with ongoing section 6 negotiations, I say let them pound salt.
You know, even if the proffered FDA LOA is a vast improvement, it likely will only affect 3% of the pilot group. What's the dam hurry? A successful FDA LOA is much more beneficial to the company than it is to US! Remember, if you don't LIKE the current LOA, DON'T BID IT! When the company CAN'T FILL THE BID, the WILL improve it on their own!
I am disappointed that the MEC is even discussing this outside of section 6 talks. Here we go again, giving in to management when if we would, just ONCE, hold our ground we might see great gains for ALL of us.
I couldn't say it better myself. We have an LOA now. Those in those HKG thought it was good enough to bid it. I am not overly sympathetic towards them. I voted against the LOA, thought it was extremely cheap. I don't want to throw anyone under the bus, but we should improve the FDA agreement in our next contract!
The company obviously wants this FDA pretty bad. Let's expedite contract talks and make it happen. There is no reason that it takes years for a contract to be TA'd. We have little leverage with our pilot group and the company knows it. We can't guys to stop flying disputed pairings, so now we think we are going to stand tough when it becomes more difficult? The company screws us with contract language (4.A.2.b) and offers vacation buybacks within months (not even mentioning the enormous draft, volunteeer, and ridiculous reserve usage).
NO LOA until a TA!
10-12-2010 | 08:48 AM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,804
Likes: 0
Are we trying to reestablish the good working relationship with the company the same way we did last time?
What a crock!!
Negotiate us a new contract and do not be swayed by the smoke screen!!!
The company wants this, well I want a new contract now not in two years!!
If they really want this then step up the pace and get the contract done by December. That works for me.
I VOTE NO!!!
What a crock!!
Negotiate us a new contract and do not be swayed by the smoke screen!!!
The company wants this, well I want a new contract now not in two years!!
If they really want this then step up the pace and get the contract done by December. That works for me.
I VOTE NO!!!
10-12-2010 | 09:12 AM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
From: 727 Captain
While I desire this process to come and go as quickly as any of you. Might we be a little wary of how the new FARs will affect our ability to earn CHs? Work rules could become an achilles heal depending upon the how the rules are written. If the new Congress acts on this piece of legislation as fast as the Age 65 rule change, we could be seeing this change by next summer. I can wait for then to make sure the CBA reflects all those nuances.
Next summer? Ha! I need to go a little easier on the morning rum in my coffee.
Next summer? Ha! I need to go a little easier on the morning rum in my coffee.
10-12-2010 | 09:12 AM
#17
"blue collar thug"!
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,614
Likes: 0
From: A proponent of...
If the Company is the one that really wants a new LOA now, somehow I think we will end up with the short end of the stick. History...
I agree with most here, that the Company is the one that really wants it, so to include it in a TA instead of a separate LOA could make for a quicker contract ratification. The FDA stuff should be one of the last sections to be TA'd. If the Company agrees to terms on an LOA that the MEC doesnt like, we will have some bargaining power.
But, once again, maybe I am mixing ignorance and leverage, or I am in perpetual self help mode.
Time will tell. IMO history shows my thoughts on the last FDA were right on, plus some. I never thought of the excess bid angle to initially try to fill HKG. They are much smarter than "us".
I agree with most here, that the Company is the one that really wants it, so to include it in a TA instead of a separate LOA could make for a quicker contract ratification. The FDA stuff should be one of the last sections to be TA'd. If the Company agrees to terms on an LOA that the MEC doesnt like, we will have some bargaining power.
But, once again, maybe I am mixing ignorance and leverage, or I am in perpetual self help mode.
Time will tell. IMO history shows my thoughts on the last FDA were right on, plus some. I never thought of the excess bid angle to initially try to fill HKG. They are much smarter than "us".
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
