FedEx TA poll Farce
 

So what is the point in having a poll on the TA on this Forum?

How do you limit it to only those elligible to vote on the TA since everone's identity is a secret.

Who cares what non FedExer's think about the TA.

What a joke.


Miss me?

Sorry I had to study.

Turp

I'm sure the Wilson center could do better, but I used what I had. For informational purposes only, not to be used for navigational purposes.

Not even one small bit :D

What is the point of listening to you? We don't know if you are really Chuck Turpen. You could be a 16 year old dropout in your parent's basement trolling for laughs.

The poll is up because somebody was curious what this online community of malcontents and jv players (not the varsity as you claim to be) thinks of the TA.

What do you care if its up, if it doesn't mean anything?

I for one find it very interesting. Doesn't mean I think it is necessarily accurate or representative of the crew force overall but it is still very interesting.

The proponents of hysteria on here where proven right by history on the last FDA LOA and the same will likely happen again.

Don't you have some AVA you could be flying?

You need to post more often. Bigger. In color. And, maybe with a frontal view. :)

[C


I do respect you though because of your hot avatar!

Hey NoHaz--as a proud member of Chuck's "angry 20," I appreciate the non-scientific snapshot. Now the folks in NH are spending some ALPA budget to get a preview of how this will pan out. Stay strong out there and demand better! ;)

The artistry of the black and white photo is lost on much of the digital world! :)

We should petition the moderators for larger avatar photos.

So Chuck, the fact that the company is trying to improve the LOA and the fact that they had to improve it several times during the last ratification vote doesn't prove that those who voted against the LOA weren't correct?

What ever you say.

Your personal convictions are getting to me,Chuck. I’m going to be honest with you .

I really don’t look like a !960’s cowboy with a fake eye patch…… whew….finally got that off my chest.

Sheesh Chuck, you must be really worried that this "Thing" won't pass......

Like I said before, I can wait five years without a raise and I'm not waiting on an upgrade.

Just posting my thoughts like the rest of you.

I asked my grandaughter to poll her kindergarden class on the TA. I think the results will be interesting.

Hope to get them posted so we can compare with the results of this scientific poll.

That is fine Chuck, it is an open board, your opinion is just as valid as anybody else's. So why don't you go ahead and answer the question?

I predict around 60 percent will vote. The majority of those that don't vote must be happy with what they have to not participate.

I also predict that out of those that do vote it will pass by 70 percent.

We'll see, voting starts today.

Nice try, but that is not the question. The question is are you maintaining that those who voted against the current FDA LOA weren't proven by the history of improvements offered by the company during that vote, since, and in this TA to be correct in their assessment of the original FDA LOA?

That is the question. I maintain that the proponents of hysteria on here and all of those who voted against the last FDA LOA were proven out by history to have been correct. You still saying you disagree? If so, anything to back it up, or is it just your opinion?

Not scientific at all, but had dinner last night with 7 other crewmembers. 6 No's, 1 Not Sure. Reasons ranged from not enough money, to the reserve sick time change, to the lack of a 4a2b remedy, and the paltry 1% bonus thingy. Seniority ranged from 5-25 years. No widebody guys.

I know guys will say one thing and do another (or not vote at all) but I haven't flown or talked to anyone that is "for" this TA. It will be an interesting result. Perhaps an overwhelming "Against" vote is more of a message for the NC and the MEC than the company. Still lots of bad internal blood out there, IMO.

Each negotiating situation is different. The NC did what they could do at the time on the first FDA.

Because the company is offering improvements now doesn't mean they would have sweetened the pot if the first TA had been rejected. Maybe they would have. No hard evidene so no proof.

What is evident is that the company wants to get the new FDAs in place and they would prefer to do it with experienced pilots rather than new hires. Which they could do with no LOA.

Like I said in an earlier post, we (pilots and FedEx) are poised to be on the crest of the international economic recovery wave and out pace our competitors. FDAs part of that.

Yes SIBA deadheads are great but the yield per package is what pays our salaries.

We could give up our vacation that will improve the company's yield per package.

Again, common ground. So you do understand that the FDA offers some leverage for ALPA against the company in these negotiations. It appears that most of the folks on the line, in the school house and on here feel that we should have gotten some more improvements in this TA then the company has offered in exchange for that leverage.

I agree with them, and will vote no on this TA.

We will see if those folks are actually representative of the crew force as a whole.

Chuck, with management skills like these, the company NEEDS you back in a management position!*?

Is that why one of the recent new hires is going to HKG. Because they can fill it with that great negotiated LOA? :confused:

Just making sure I understand your prediction:

Will that be 70% Yes - 30% No...or....85% Yes - 15% No...???

Really? According to someone who was there for the negotiations, they(our NC) took the first offer. Quite the negotiations skill.

According to the chief pilot in HKG, the company was willing to go up to $4000 a month for housing. Again, he said it. Fact? I don't know.

Apparently you disagree that the current FDA LOA is woefully inadequate. You, BC, and DW. Brilliant!

You're probably right that it will pass. I hope not. Numerous issues could be addressed now. Issues which have no connection to the NPRM. A large number of pilots voiced their concerns that they did not want an FDA LOA without a contract. Yes, this TA technically meets those requirements. And if the minimum wasn't good enough, it wouldn't be the minimum. How bout shooting a little higher. Most folks aren't shootin for the moon, but let's aim a little higher than each others head.

"That's all I gots ta say bout that"

That's weird. All my interaction with guys is that they "will probably vote for it". No one's excited by it, but I think most guys are being logical and realizing that 3% now is better than maybe 3% later plus some bastardized formula for a "signing bonus".

I really think there are quite a few people running around saying they won't vote for it just to avoid being bitten by the rabid dogs.

You see that too. It technically is an FDA LOA with a few small bones thrown in. But to me, forget the bones; it is an FDA LOA. The effect is almost the same. The Company gets what they want and we dont get much. If it was a real TA, everything except the work rules would be on the table now. The Company, and or others are pretty whiley. Smoke and mirrors. IMO of course!

I agree with the Original Poster. Wilson Polling is a farce, I mean did the MEC or the NC address any of the top 50 Wilson Poll Priorities? Where do they publish those results anyways? Oh he meant APC polling was a farce; never mind.

Someone asked that at the roadshow i was at, the answer was to look at the openers (ALPA's) all those were generated from the various sources of input. ALPA has not given up on any of those goals is what was said.

If you think they gave up on them and have forever and have ignored us, I think that is wrong. Could they have put more in this deal? Well they said no. It really is a matter of, do you believe the NC and MEC that this is not your grandfather's TA?

If you feel the signing of this TA will delay our important goals, further that is, I would vote no. Pretty simple, but to think there is stuff on the table that was achievable now, is mythical, from the answers and communications i have read and seen. YMMV:)

I do not think they gave up on them and forever ignored them. I just think we will have to give up too much to have them fixed once our only leverage is gone. But Section 18 must have been at the top of the wilson polling data right?

I would surmise it was at the BOTTOM (probably on no ones list!) since it was done as one of the easy or housekeeping sections in the beginning? I am quite sure from the coorespondace we have seen on this TA that ALPA did not rush in to "fix" this section at the expense of important gains when the deal took hold. It was explained by JG in the video that the TA's were all the ones already done and the bridge concept was very recent, after these sections had been agreed to.

You are correct, section 18 does not mean much to us. Except the money to cover ALPA pilots work for the Company ,that does help our collective budgets. I do not see the lack of priority that you do, from explanations I have seen on how this TA was structured.