Airline Pilot Central Forums - FDX-FDA Bargaining

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Cargo (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/cargo/)

- - FDX-FDA Bargaining (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/cargo/54032-fdx-fda-bargaining.html)

I bet SS gets voted in as ALPA Prez tomorrow, so don't count on his leading us through this negotiation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fedex999999 (Post 883778)

I bet SS gets voted in as ALPA Prez tomorrow, so don't count on his leading us through this negotiation.

I would hate to lose him at this critical time in negotiations ... wonder what happens to us then? New election?

Having lived overseas, I thought that the first LOA was totally and completely inadequate (by about $8000-$12000/month). In it, we gave away the most valuable bargaining chip, working under US labor law, not French law, and got nothing for it! Right now the company needs a new LOA. They can't fill the current FDA even with multiple excess bids and reduced flying hours. We need to use this leverage for our contract negotiations. No LOA, if the company wants new FDA rules, we can have them in a TA that is beneficial to the majority of FedEx pilots, no need to spend years in negotiation. If we sign a LOA, we will not see a TA till the cows come home.
NO LOA
NO LOA
NO LOA

MM, The MEC then elects a new Chairman, just like a regular election.

No one here see's the parallel to the money that we gave up after the postal contract while we held out for more using our "leverage"?

An FDA LOA may be some leverage, but it is definitely not enough for the company to expedite any contract negotiations. To the contrary, given our companies philosophy on labor relations, us passing on a "good" LOA will probably result in them going out of their way to make sure whatever we eventually do get is less than what was initially offered (just to make a point).

There's SIBA for Cologne and inefficient pairings and DH's for MD11 HKG. After a couple of years of covering the 2 potential bases, the cost of business will be built in, and we as a pilot group will not see any enhancements to the current FDA LOA (and we'll probably still be in contract negotiations).

All that being said, if the MEC and Neg committee send us a LOA, I'll weigh it on its merits with my own judgement and vote accordingly.

SIBA and inefficent pairings means more pilots and more seniority for me, a chance I am willing to take.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FDXLAG (Post 883895)

SIBA and inefficent pairings means more pilots and more seniority for me, a chance I am willing to take.

No doubt.
Its also the price the company will more than likely be willing to pay.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Overnitefr8 (Post 883539)

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.

Well said!

If the MEC pushes ahead with this and actually brings an FDA LOA to a vote while we are still in contract negotiations, the vote may turn out NOT to be on the merits of any FDA LOA improvements offered, rather a referendum on the MEC leadership itself.

I think they may be causing a unity issue here thru their actions.

The MEC needs to listen to it's membership and re-evaluate their position on this issue ---- now!

p.s. It's interesting that the current poll does not have a "straight up" question asking members directly if we should be negotiating a FDA LOA outside of contract negotiations. I'd like to see the results of a "straight up" poll.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 990Convair (Post 883546)

...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.

Ditto :confused::(:mad:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Good Beer (Post 883883)

Good Beer -

I am confused by your logic.

If the company has the power to somehow dictate to us a "lesser" FDA package by merely waiting us out then why don't they just do that in the first place?

Why isn't that their optimal strategy from the beginning?

Why are they willing to gives us a "better" FDA now, but no later? ....spite???

It doesn't make any business sense ---- an after all "it's just business".

What evidence do you have that the company somehow gives us things out of the goodness of their hearts?

The company is telling us it needs something ---- soon --- perhaps, very soon.

If they truly, truly didn't they wouldn't be talking to us.

If you haven't noticed, when they can do things unilaterally --- they just do it --- they don't waste time talking to us or asking our permission.

They aren't going to go out and hire Chinese pilots or European pilots --- they only want to deal with one pilot group and one set of labor laws --- and that pilot group is us.