Fdx TA.. On the fence
02-14-2011, 10:33 AM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: MD-11 Capt
Posts: 330
Originally Posted by pipe
I was a 100% no as well. One thing in the video moved me to 60% no.
If you blinked you would have missed it, but I thought he saidin the video that he thought we should take the deal and then bag it at the one year point. That makes a lot of sense to me. Lock in all the stuff that's in there and then let them know in January (9.5 months after signing) that we are done with it and go back into negotiations.
If the MEC would give me a warm fuzzy that they would back out at the one year point, I would consider a yes.
I really need to hear more specifics on how the decision would be made to back out after one year.
PIPE
If you blinked you would have missed it, but I thought he saidin the video that he thought we should take the deal and then bag it at the one year point. That makes a lot of sense to me. Lock in all the stuff that's in there and then let them know in January (9.5 months after signing) that we are done with it and go back into negotiations.
If the MEC would give me a warm fuzzy that they would back out at the one year point, I would consider a yes.
I really need to hear more specifics on how the decision would be made to back out after one year.
PIPE
the pay scale agreement is "null and void"
02-14-2011, 10:40 AM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: MD-11 Captain
Posts: 4,304
Originally Posted by hypoxia
By ratifying this "new" TA, the company in essence has set a precedent or in other words, validated that retirement at age 60 is contractual and acceptable post Age 65 legislation. What do we have to potentially gain by keeping the retirement age at 60?
1. No loss of B fund contributions
2. Less penalty for retiring early ie: 3% a year.
3. A legal/contractual precedence for future negotiations to keep the retirement age at 60.
Just a thought!
1. No loss of B fund contributions
2. Less penalty for retiring early ie: 3% a year.
3. A legal/contractual precedence for future negotiations to keep the retirement age at 60.
Just a thought!
hypoxia,
I like how you think ... While I'm on your team on this issue (Keeping "normal" retirement age at 60 is my #1 personal issue, followed closely by recouping my 4.a.2.b losses), why do you think this sets some sort of precedent? I might have guessed this went in the "to be negotiated later with a long list of other sh*t" column?
Is this just your opinion or do you have some sort of legal or negotiating background on which you base this opinion?
MM
Last edited by MaydayMark; 02-14-2011 at 10:45 AM. Reason: typo
02-14-2011, 10:44 AM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: Airbus F/O
Posts: 148
Just spent 20 minutes on the phone with JG. he called me les than 45 minutes after I emailed him. That's a pretty good response in my book.
I have now moved to undecided since I don't have to vote today. if today I vote no still.
I told JG I was concerned that our bridge could be a bridge to no where.
If at the end of the year I thought we could continue down the same road and lose nothing I'd vote yes on this TA. But we've been fooled before and I don't see any reason we won't be fooled again.
I have now moved to undecided since I don't have to vote today. if today I vote no still.
I told JG I was concerned that our bridge could be a bridge to no where.
If at the end of the year I thought we could continue down the same road and lose nothing I'd vote yes on this TA. But we've been fooled before and I don't see any reason we won't be fooled again.
02-14-2011, 11:01 AM
#35
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: Soon to be set free
Posts: 71
Originally Posted by drftddgr
That's a very good point which I'd like to tag onto.
If we accept this we need to take our gains and get started bargaining again asap.
We need to have a solid contract long term nailed down before postal contract negotiations just in case.
If we accept this we need to take our gains and get started bargaining again asap.
We need to have a solid contract long term nailed down before postal contract negotiations just in case.
By the way, the postal contract is a rolling contract......
02-14-2011, 11:12 AM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 983
Originally Posted by Malter
Dude! Are you baggin' me?! If we accept this, WE GIVE AWAY THE ONLY REAL BARGAINING CHIP WE HAVE! Think! Why do we have a TA so quickly? Because the company is desperate for the FDA. Period! Sure, give it to 'em for scraps from Long Shanks table and they'll be sure to jump right back in to negotiations to give us everything else we want! YGBSM!
By the way, the postal contract is a rolling contract......
By the way, the postal contract is a rolling contract......
USPS News Release: U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, FEDEX EXPRESS AGREE TO NEW CONTRACT FOR AIR TRANSPORTATION OF MAIL
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Download PDF
Media Contact: 202-268-2155
News Release #06-048
August 1, 2006
U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, FEDEX EXPRESS AGREE TO
NEW CONTRACT FOR AIR TRANSPORTATION OF MAIL
New contract will continue through 2013
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Postal Service (USPS) and FedEx Express, a subsidiary of FedEx Corp., have agreed to a new contract for domestic air transportation of postal express shipments. The new agreement continues through September 2013, and supercedes the current contract which was set to expire in August of 2008.
In 2001 the Postal Service and FedEx Express signed a seven-year contract for airport-to-airport delivery of Priority Mail, Express Mail and First-Class Mail within the United States. The contract announced today replaces the final two years of that contract and adds five additional years of service.
“The new contract allows the Postal Service and FedEx to continue our successful business relationship,” said Postmaster General John E. Potter. “This relationship benefits postal customers by allowing us to maintain our high service standards while keeping costs affordable.”
“Reaching a new agreement a full two years ahead of schedule is proof positive of the excellent relationship that FedEx has developed with the U.S. Postal Service,” said David J. Bronczek, president and chief executive officer of FedEx Express. “We are proud of the trust the Postal Service has placed in us and their confidence in our fast, reliable and efficient service.”
The new agreement is worth approximately $1 billion a year for a minimum of seven years. FedEx Express will fly about 4 million pounds of U.S. mail every business day. The 2001 retail agreement, giving FedEx the opportunity to place FedEx self-service collection boxes on postal property, is not affected by today’s announcement. That portion of the contract expires in 2009.
USPS News Release: USPS and FedEx Renew Global Express Guaranteed Agreement
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Aug. 19, 2009 Media Contact: Yvonne Yoerger
(O) 202-268-8596
(C) 202-258-4322
[email protected]
usps.com/news
Release No. 09-071
USPS and FedEx Renew Global Express Guaranteed Agreement
Co-Branded Service Provides Premium International Delivery
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Postal Service and FedEx Express have renewed their alliance for Global Express Guaranteed (GXG), the Postal Service's premier, date-certain international delivery service to more than 190 countries and territories.
“The Postal Service is pleased to renew this important agreement with FedEx,” said Pranab Shah, USPS vice president and managing director, Global Business. “We plan to build on the accomplishments of the initial agreement, enhancing GXG’s world-class service reliability by using the resources of both organizations to provide quality and value for our customers.”
GXG shipping labels and packaging feature both Postal Service and FedEx logos.
“Global Express Guaranteed leverages the two great transportation networks of FedEx Express and the Postal Service to bring greater choice and convenience for customers,” said T. Michael Glenn, FedEx executive vice president for Market Development. “This agreement combines the global reach, convenience, speed and reliability of the Postal Service and FedEx Express in a natural extension of our long-standing relationship.”
USPS and FedEx began offering the co-branded GXG service in 2004. GXG is available at thousands of participating postal retail locations nationwide, and through Click-N-Ship online at usps.com.
02-14-2011, 11:13 AM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
Originally Posted by 42GO
You might want to read the agreement letter that says if we opt out at 1 year
the pay scale agreement is "null and void"
the pay scale agreement is "null and void"
02-14-2011, 11:22 AM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Originally Posted by Gunter
Only the last 3% raise is null and void. Still get the other 4% if we opt out at the 12 month point.
02-14-2011, 11:49 AM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2010
Posts: 278
Originally Posted by MaydayMark
hypoxia,
I like how you think ... While I'm on your team on this issue (Keeping "normal" retirement age at 60 is my #1 personal issue, followed closely by recouping my 4.a.2.b losses), why do you think this sets some sort of precedent? I might have guessed this went in the "to be negotiated later with a long list of other sh*t" column?
Is this just your opinion or do you have some sort of legal or negotiating background on which you base this opinion?
MM
I like how you think ... While I'm on your team on this issue (Keeping "normal" retirement age at 60 is my #1 personal issue, followed closely by recouping my 4.a.2.b losses), why do you think this sets some sort of precedent? I might have guessed this went in the "to be negotiated later with a long list of other sh*t" column?
Is this just your opinion or do you have some sort of legal or negotiating background on which you base this opinion?
MM
The notion that a "new CBA" is only a partially negotiated CBA is nonsense! The fact is, that sections were negotiated to not be negotiated and if ratified, we may have to live with this "new CBA" for many years before another TA is presented.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
