So it looks like we are negotiating a new FDA deal outside of Section 6 negotiations.

Brilliant. Nothing like giving away one of our best points of leverage at the beginning of contract negotiations.

This may be the most stupid move since... our last FDA LOA.

ALPA email follows:

FDA bargaining

Undoubtedly, the thrust of FedEx Express’s growth lies in the international arena. In order to achieve synergies in our vast route system, management has tried to stand up two Foreign Duty Assignments (FDAs) since 2007. They have been moderately successful with the HKG Airbus FDA, although First Officer slots remain unfilled after multiple bids. Until very recently, efforts in the European theater have failed to yield a solution. However, continuing demand for access to Asian markets and a potentially favorable reception from a new, different European state, Germany, have lead the Company to seek two new FDAs, HKG MD-11 and CGN 757.

In May of this year, management approached us about the two new FDAs. We agreed to conduct a site survey of CGN and visited there in June. We then held preliminary talks with the Company in early summer. We were very clear that any new agreement with regard to FDAs would have to be vastly superior to the current FDA LOA. Specifically, we told management that any viable LOA needed an improved rental allowance with a recognition for currency fluctuation, education financial assistance for a pilot’s children, scheduling improvements and quality of life enhancements.

The company proffered a new FDA LOA during the 9/22-24 bargaining sessions that recognized our issues outlined above. It was not a “taker,” but it did demonstrate a commitment to a deal on our terms. With the assistance of the LEC 14 (HKG) Block Representative, we proffered a counterproposal within a day of receiving the Company’s proposal. We made it clear that if the company decided to counter our offer, we would receive their offer and consult with the MEC to determine whether further talks were warranted. On 10/5, management provided a new document that indicated to our committee that they were serious about obtaining a deal. Friday, we briefed the MEC on the current table positions and the path forward as we see it.

The MEC has authorized us to respond to the company’s current offer. The MEC and our committee, in consultation with ALPA’s Director of Representation, did not make this decision lightly. Historically, LOAs have been bargained on our property during contract talks. However, we are acutely aware of the need for significant improvements to the current FDA LOA. The value of the LOA should be so clear that a member could make his or her own judgment without any outside assistance or interpretation from the MEC leadership. Simply put, we want to produce a document which speaks for itself.

 

100% agree. How anxious is the company going to come back when we say we'd like a pay raise?

 

They have to hurry and close a deal before the poll closes on Oct 19th. After all the poll might show the membership does not want them to do an FDA LOA seperate from a new CBA.

Just kidding, I know what the membership wants has nothing to do with what the MEC will do, poll or no poll.

 

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).

 

The FDA LOA should not be neg outside of the contract. The way it should be looked at by the negotiators at the table is that the Company wants the FDA, so what are they willing to give US for it. We are not asking for an FDA LOA in europe, the company is. If they want it bad enough, then they can give us something that we want for it, otherwise they can just use the current FDA package that is in the CBA to open it.

 

I am all for giving them the benefit of the doubt, right after they tell us their reasons for negotiating a seperate agreement. Is that too much to ask?

I love the positive thinking, how much will we have to give up for improved FDA benies in the new contract. Here's a thought how much will they have to give up on 4A2b to open a new FDA.

 

This could very well be a "Red Herring" by the company.

The costs of the FDA while they may seem like a lot to us neophytes with bags under our eyes, but to the company they might be small potatoes. So we get snookered into a new FDA LOA while we think we are negotiating a great new CBA with a lot of leverage in our hip pocket, sign some LOA that will benefit a small percentage of our crew force, and the aggregate of the membership gets stuck holding the bag with a "cost neutral CBA" with an enhanced 4A2B clause that will surely bite us in the next 5 years.
This proposed LOA could bring new life to the words of DW, "It will go senior".

Meanwhile the rest of us will be back here flying 5 leg out and backs, eating scooby snacks and living comfortably in our crashpads due to the updated FAR limits.

NO NEW FDA LOA !!!

We need a contract that fixes many features that have been ignored for far too long. Regrettably we are all too familiar with some of them. The FDA language appears to be something the company wants repaired. What we have here is "an opportunity to communicate".

Let's not screw this one up kids.

 

Are you the same guys who were holding out for A380 rates for the 777?

 

No but I'll bet the new LOA First guys were. I''ll bet most of us who think it is silly to solve the companies problems before we sign a new contract could not have cared less about a 777 payrate.

 

Well, I feel like I was robbed. Now the person that robbed me wants me to pay for his lawyer....