Letter from IPA President to all UPS FQS
03-07-2011, 02:25 PM
#11
Freightmama!
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: 757/767 FO
Posts: 2,880
Originally Posted by Tigerpilot1995
I believe the IPA EB believes the NPRM will be mired in a legal mess for quite a few years to come. I suspect the airlines will sue the federal gov't over the "financially burdensome" nature of the NPRM. Never underestimate the power of money.
03-07-2011, 03:50 PM
#12
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
Originally Posted by Freightpuppy
I thought you couldn't sue the gov't.
Right now the majority of States are suing the Federal government over a particular law that was recently passed.
In the past UPS has had to go to court against both the Federal government and numerous states just to do business in the good old USA.
03-07-2011, 04:14 PM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: Unknown
Posts: 372
And I hope they win. Being able to buy insurance on my cell phone in the ambulance on the way to the hospital with a guaranteed policy at the same price as people (of the same age) not currently in an ambulance will be a BIG savings on my healthcare costs. No use carrying insurance until you need it. It'll be interesting to see how that business model works out for them -- profitwise.
03-08-2011, 07:00 AM
#14
On Reserve
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 15
There have been some questions about the commitment of the FQS.
Their hesitation is understandable.
For years they have been told that the IPA is the enemy and now all of a sudden the IPA is the solution.
There are two choices:
-joining the IPA means offering them stability, a number on the seniority list and a guaranteed job until retirement, but it might come with a (temporary) pay cut.
-Remaining a FQS with UPS on the other hand is a shaky roll of the dice at best.
No guarantees. There will be a lot of uncertainness about job security, based on the proposed NPRM rules. What the IPA has uncovered in the comments by UPS in reply to the NPRM is pretty clear.
If UPS does not exactly get what they want from the FAA, they will eliminate the FQS positions:
With respect to considering all “administrative” work performed by a management pilot as duty, UPS believes that the unintended consequence is that all management pilot positions will become non-flying positions. (P.75)
I assume that the Company’s intention to eliminate the FQS jobs has been made abundantly clear to all FQS by management.
Therefore the content and consequences of Docket No. FAA-2009-1093 should not be news to them.
Then the question becomes whether UPS will retain administrative employees at airline pilot salaries?
Time for some soul searching.
BCM
Their hesitation is understandable.
For years they have been told that the IPA is the enemy and now all of a sudden the IPA is the solution.
There are two choices:
-joining the IPA means offering them stability, a number on the seniority list and a guaranteed job until retirement, but it might come with a (temporary) pay cut.
-Remaining a FQS with UPS on the other hand is a shaky roll of the dice at best.
No guarantees. There will be a lot of uncertainness about job security, based on the proposed NPRM rules. What the IPA has uncovered in the comments by UPS in reply to the NPRM is pretty clear.
If UPS does not exactly get what they want from the FAA, they will eliminate the FQS positions:
With respect to considering all “administrative” work performed by a management pilot as duty, UPS believes that the unintended consequence is that all management pilot positions will become non-flying positions. (P.75)
I assume that the Company’s intention to eliminate the FQS jobs has been made abundantly clear to all FQS by management.
Therefore the content and consequences of Docket No. FAA-2009-1093 should not be news to them.
Then the question becomes whether UPS will retain administrative employees at airline pilot salaries?
Time for some soul searching.
BCM
03-08-2011, 07:13 AM
#15
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
Originally Posted by Blue Collar Man
There have been some questions about the commitment of the FQS.
Their hesitation is understandable.
For years they have been told that the IPA is the enemy and now all of a sudden the IPA is the solution.
There are two choices:
-joining the IPA means offering them stability, a number on the seniority list and a guaranteed job until retirement, but it might come with a (temporary) pay cut.
-Remaining a FQS with UPS on the other hand is a shaky roll of the dice at best.
No guarantees. There will be a lot of uncertainness about job security, based on the proposed NPRM rules. What the IPA has uncovered in the comments by UPS in reply to the NPRM is pretty clear.
If UPS does not exactly get what they want from the FAA, they will eliminate the FQS positions:
With respect to considering all “administrative” work performed by a management pilot as duty, UPS believes that the unintended consequence is that all management pilot positions will become non-flying positions. (P.75)
I assume that the Company’s intention to eliminate the FQS jobs has been made abundantly clear to all FQS by management.
Therefore the content and consequences of Docket No. FAA-2009-1093 should not be news to them.
Then the question becomes whether UPS will retain administrative employees at airline pilot salaries?
Time for some soul searching.
BCM
Their hesitation is understandable.
For years they have been told that the IPA is the enemy and now all of a sudden the IPA is the solution.
There are two choices:
-joining the IPA means offering them stability, a number on the seniority list and a guaranteed job until retirement, but it might come with a (temporary) pay cut.
-Remaining a FQS with UPS on the other hand is a shaky roll of the dice at best.
No guarantees. There will be a lot of uncertainness about job security, based on the proposed NPRM rules. What the IPA has uncovered in the comments by UPS in reply to the NPRM is pretty clear.
If UPS does not exactly get what they want from the FAA, they will eliminate the FQS positions:
With respect to considering all “administrative” work performed by a management pilot as duty, UPS believes that the unintended consequence is that all management pilot positions will become non-flying positions. (P.75)
I assume that the Company’s intention to eliminate the FQS jobs has been made abundantly clear to all FQS by management.
Therefore the content and consequences of Docket No. FAA-2009-1093 should not be news to them.
Then the question becomes whether UPS will retain administrative employees at airline pilot salaries?
Time for some soul searching.
BCM
I understand that it fits the narrative of the IPA as a slayer of dragons and destroyer of worlds, but you have overlooked a great many other possibilities in the pending outcome.
03-08-2011, 09:09 AM
#18
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 85
I'm not proclaiming anything genius.
I just always get such a kick out of you - Mr. Union-hating Unionist. I also enjoy how you sit high up on your perceived perch and play critic while never offering any suggestions. You're the ultimate critic, yet one who never actually gets in the game.
Keep posting though, cause your comedy value is priceless.
I just always get such a kick out of you - Mr. Union-hating Unionist. I also enjoy how you sit high up on your perceived perch and play critic while never offering any suggestions. You're the ultimate critic, yet one who never actually gets in the game.
Keep posting though, cause your comedy value is priceless.
03-08-2011, 09:14 AM
#19
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: Serving the chicken and taking the first break.
Posts: 88
Originally Posted by jungle
I hate to be the one to break the news, but you have created a myth based on some very large assumptions, which may or may not prove to be true.
I understand that it fits the narrative of the IPA as a slayer of dragons and destroyer of worlds, but you have overlooked a great many other possibilities in the pending outcome.
I understand that it fits the narrative of the IPA as a slayer of dragons and destroyer of worlds, but you have overlooked a great many other possibilities in the pending outcome.
One of the myths is guarateed job untill retirement. Right now me, and 105 others would challenge you on that one Bob!!!!
03-08-2011, 09:16 AM
#20
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: Serving the chicken and taking the first break.
Posts: 88
Originally Posted by Freightpuppy
I thought you couldn't sue the gov't.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
