UPS Earnings
02-03-2011, 01:09 AM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Posts: 295
Pilot7576,
Wouldn't it be better for everyone else if that position was taken up by someone else on the seniority list, someone who could, upon completion of the training, actually be productive? I don't understand why someone would actually say that "if it ties up the training department it works for me!" Sounds like someone is happier wasting a training slot, than moving up one crew position. Oh well, to each his own.
JJ
Wouldn't it be better for everyone else if that position was taken up by someone else on the seniority list, someone who could, upon completion of the training, actually be productive? I don't understand why someone would actually say that "if it ties up the training department it works for me!" Sounds like someone is happier wasting a training slot, than moving up one crew position. Oh well, to each his own.
JJ
Wasting a training slot-
a) takes a line holding pilot off the line
b) is UNPRODUCTIVE (that's the point)
c) delays the training of a furloughees/displacees replacement (as long as the newly typed 744 pilot retires immediately afterward)
I don't give a sh!t about moving up a position as long as it helps my 109 brothers/sisters out.
Last edited by J Dawg; 02-03-2011 at 06:21 AM.
02-03-2011, 03:14 AM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: Retired
Posts: 3,717
Sounds like you'd be happier if your company went out of business. That'd show the ba$tards. Theoretically if someone leaves, that means someone gets to come (back) on board. At least at a normal airline. I'm certainly glad that I left UPS when I did, because I'm sure I would do a poor job handling the way your company treats its employees.
JJ
JJ
02-03-2011, 04:06 AM
#24
Tri-tanic operator
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Doggie
Posts: 2,382
Pilot7576,
Thanks for explaining that to me, but your explanation had nothing at all to do with my post. My point was that (I feel) guys shouldn't be able to take up a training slot, just to get another type rating, just prior to retirement. My post had nothing to do with paying for training. In fact, what I was suggesting was that if someone went through training and got their type rating, then immediately put in their paperwork for retirement, said pilot should have to repay the company for the expense they incurred in training him or her.
JJ
Thanks for explaining that to me, but your explanation had nothing at all to do with my post. My point was that (I feel) guys shouldn't be able to take up a training slot, just to get another type rating, just prior to retirement. My post had nothing to do with paying for training. In fact, what I was suggesting was that if someone went through training and got their type rating, then immediately put in their paperwork for retirement, said pilot should have to repay the company for the expense they incurred in training him or her.
JJ
UPS has the option to "bypass" someone within 2 years (I think) of retirement. If it were an upgrade, the FO would receive Captains pay as an FO for their last 2 years.
BUT ... even for lateral moves (Capt to Capt) UPS has chosen to bypass very few pilots. UPS has trained many 63+ year olds, instead of paying them to stay in their present seat.
Theoretically if someone leaves, that means someone gets to come (back) on board. At least at a normal airline.
02-03-2011, 06:12 AM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: UPS Captain
Posts: 837
I believe your employer is much better to his employees. Most of the stuff I read about Fred is pretty pro worker. He understands what a positive, productive employee can do. He also understands what a negative, unproductive one can do. Great leaders have always made the unproductive ones into productive ones.
02-03-2011, 09:35 AM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: Leftof longitudinal
Posts: 1,899
Pilot7576,
.... In fact, what I was suggesting was that if someone went through training and got their type rating, then immediately put in their paperwork for retirement, said pilot should have to repay the company for the expense they incurred in training him or her.
I understand the contentiousness that's going on at UPS right now, and this same scenario might also be happening at FedEx, but that said, it makes no sense at all, from a company point of view, nor from a crew-force-in-general point of view, to allow someone to take up a training slot, just to retire immediately upon completion of the course. Wouldn't it be better for everyone else if that position was taken up by someone else on the seniority list, someone who could, upon completion of the training, actually be productive? I don't understand why someone would actually say that "if it ties up the training department it works for me!" Sounds like someone is happier wasting a training slot, than moving up one crew position. Oh well, to each his own.
JJ
.... In fact, what I was suggesting was that if someone went through training and got their type rating, then immediately put in their paperwork for retirement, said pilot should have to repay the company for the expense they incurred in training him or her.
I understand the contentiousness that's going on at UPS right now, and this same scenario might also be happening at FedEx, but that said, it makes no sense at all, from a company point of view, nor from a crew-force-in-general point of view, to allow someone to take up a training slot, just to retire immediately upon completion of the course. Wouldn't it be better for everyone else if that position was taken up by someone else on the seniority list, someone who could, upon completion of the training, actually be productive? I don't understand why someone would actually say that "if it ties up the training department it works for me!" Sounds like someone is happier wasting a training slot, than moving up one crew position. Oh well, to each his own.
JJ
You are thinking logically. IPA thought logically too. UPS says they would rather train crews and then let them retire. Some guys decide to exercise seniority before they retire. Really they want a few extra credit hours in a month on a different fleet. UPS thinks they are 'showing them' by sending them to training.
UPS could bypass and save money, but UPS can't shake the 'show them' part. Thus, UPS decides to waste the money. Don't see the individual responsible for paying back for a bizarre UPS decision to waste shareholder money.
02-03-2011, 10:41 AM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: Retired
Posts: 3,717
Salty, if that's the case, I also wouldn't have any heartache with wasting the company's time and resources, and also then wouldn't expect any form of payback. That said, it still seems quite STUPID to me, but then again, you can't spell "stupid" without UPS.
JJ
JJ
02-05-2011, 04:10 AM
#30
Tri-tanic operator
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Doggie
Posts: 2,382
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
