Go Back   Airline Pilot Central Forums - Find your next job as a Pilot > >
Cargo Part 121 cargo airlines
 

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums - Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. Join our community today and start interacting with existing members. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.


User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 03-06-2011, 10:02 AM   #1  
On Reserve
Thread Starter
 
Blue Collar Man's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 15
Default Letter from IPA President to all UPS FQS

I have permission from the President of the IPA to post this letter on this Forum. This letter will be send to all FQS at UPS tomorrow.




Fellow UPS Pilots,

This is the most important letter we have written to date. Every one of you needs to look at the information in this letter and read it carefully. After doing so please take the time to digest this information and exactly what it means. The talking points here totally drive home what the IPA has been saying to you for months – only this time it is UPS who is saying it.

The information contained here are excerpts from the 130 page commentary submitted by UPS to the FAA concerning the proposed NPRM. Everything about it and every comment noted here lets you know exactly where you stand with UPS and what they intend to do with you if the NPRM is enacted. Pay close attention to each comment – they are clearly stating they don’t trust you to be honest with them in managing your schedule. Pay “SPECIAL ATTENTION” to the final comment made by UPS - highlighted in bold and underlined - as it relates to your position as an FQS. They are stating clearly that if this NPRM is enacted with the present duty language that you will no longer be a FLIGHT Qualified Supervisor – they are telling the FAA – and you – that they will have to put every one of you in a NON-FLYING position. You need to think about that statement long and hard. What does that that mean for you and your family? Ask your peers who were previously Flight Qualified and then moved to a non-flying position - one issue being the very large pay cut you will be forced to take when you are no longer viable as an FQS. The bigger issue you should be concerned with is; “will UPS have a reason to keep you as an employee” when your value to them is no longer 70% (or more) greater than the amount they are paying you? I believe you all know the answer to that question – and it is an emphatic “NO.”

Those of you who have expressed concerns about possibly having to move from Captain status to First Officer status as an IPA member after the fence protection period expires would do well to consider whether you will even have a job 12 months from now if you do not join IPA now. This is no threat – UPS’ comments speak for themselves. If you want to ensure your job security and your seniority by DOH here at UPS you need to get your card in ASAP! The clock is ticking and you are rolling the dice on your future and that of your family if you do not send in a card authorizing IPA representation. The UPS comments with the page number where each comment can be found are copied below:

These are actual quotes from Docket No. FAA-2009-1093, COMMENTS OF UNITED PARCEL SERVICE CO., in reply to Notice of Proposed Rulemaking FAA Notice 10-11.

UPS suggests that the FAA remove administrative duties from the definition of duty or exempt administrative duties from influencing acclimation. (P.74)

Unfortunately, the certificate holder would also be completely helpless in preventing some manipulation of this “administrative duty” provision by a flight crew member who wishes to adjust the duty period so as to make himself/herself illegal for the next subsequent duty period. (P.13)

UPS also objects to the definition of “other administrative duties” since it can greatly impact the future of certificate holders utilizing line-qualified and current management pilots. UPS believes maintaining flight-qualified management personnel is a fundamentally important aspect of our excellent safety record, and we strongly believe that including “other administrative duties” in the accumulative duty limits will have a profound negative affect on the future of flight safety. In general, the variable nature of “other administrative duties,” whether it be for management or line pilots, will be nearly impossible to manage. It is conceivable that, as presently defined, flight crewmembers will have the ability to make themselves illegal for a future FDP. These activities may be completely invisible to the certificate holder until just prior to the start of an FDP. This presents significant operational impediments and could negatively affect schedule reliability and service quality. (P.88)


  • Is there any among you who can explain how having more restrictive cumulative duty limits will have a profound “negative” impact on the future of flight safety? This very rule would prevent UPS from being able to work you in the office all day and then deadhead you to Miami early morning to have you operate a round trip to Central or South America - and a continuous 20-30 hours on the clock without a legal FAR rest. This exact scenario occurred to FQS pilots more than once over the past three weeks.
Cumulative duty limits are particularly onerous since short call reserve is considered duty as are “administrative duties.” This one aspect of cumulative duty will make this regulation unwieldy to manage since it significantly increases the concept of duty over present regulations. (P.125)


In addition, given the ever present possibility of voluntarily assumed “administrative duties,” nothing precludes a pilot from reporting such activities, so that he or she becomes unavailable for an additional reserve assignment—in this scenario, having done little more than sit at home waiting for the phone to ring. (P.14-15)

UPS recommends that the FAA specifically address the issue of management pilot duty as follows: “Management pilot duty includes all time spent during company business-related meetings and other business-related activity conducted on company property. Communications of any form during periods that a management pilot would ordinarily be considered off duty does not constitute duty for purposes of this regulation.” (P.75)

Another example of how the proposal may diminish safety margins is its recategorization of administrative activities of management pilots as “duty”, thereby reducing the total time they are available to fly and thus making it more difficult for them to maintain their flight proficiency. (exhibit 1, P.21)

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)

The URL link to the full document is also copied here for you: http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;dct=PS;rpp=10;po=0;s=FAA-2009-1093-1898.1;D=FAA-2009-1093

The above comments speak for themselves. Time is running short and you have a choice to make – one that will affect you and your family for the rest of your lives. IPA is offering you a future with written guarantees, job protection and the confidence that we will fight for you, your job and your future when you are one of us.

Can you afford to put all your eggs in one basket and count on UPS? The call is yours. Everyone who has not yet sent in a card needs to look at this long and hard and you need to speak with your family and make the decision that makes the most sense for all of you. Once you do that the choice will be clear and it will be an easy decision. Please use the card and envelope we sent you previously or download a copy of the card off of the IPA public website.

We look forward to welcoming you into the IPA, placing you on our seniority list by DOH and moving forward together with a bigger and better IPA. If you have any questions or you need a card or return mail envelope you may contact me directly at: 502-410-8700 or email to: [email protected]

Sincerely,




Robert M. Thrush
President
Independent Pilots Association
Blue Collar Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2011, 06:29 PM   #2  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: DC-8 756/767
Posts: 941
Default

Gonna be a fun couple of weeks around here!!!!
UPSFO4LIFE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2011, 07:09 PM   #3  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Posts: 339
Default

I've been following these threads for a couple days and have to say that this appears a completely illogical argument on IPA's part, almost like a last minute ditch effort to scare the last few? I have no dog in this fight, just a furloughed UAL dude with too much time on my hands.

1) So if IPA doesn't get enough cards, and the NPRM passes as is, then according to this letter a FQS will be non-flying and no longer a threat to IPA? Right? No more special mgmt reserves, ie recalls commence? Isn't this a win for IPA?

2) If IPA does get enough cards, and NPRM passes as is, a FQS can still become a non-flying position? So again, where is the extra gain for IPA if the NPRM is a done deal.

3) I understand the furlough/seniority issue, but how does this convince a FQS to turn in their card when the IPA has no more power to stop the NPRM than apparently UPS management has?

4) Finally, if this was all kept a secret from FQS types, then exactly which department crafted UPS's reply to the NPRM? The janitors? Why would they want to hire more FQSs if the below is true. AA also responded and said they would need 2200+ more pilots. Can we believe any of these comments verbatim or are they being used for political purposes.

Again, sorry for interruption. I'll go back to eating my popcorn or dealing with our own screwed up saga over at the new UniCal.

Thanks-

KC
kc135driver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2011, 07:55 PM   #4  
With The Resistance
 
jungle's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,055
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kc135driver View Post
I've been following these threads for a couple days and have to say that this appears a completely illogical argument on IPA's part, almost like a last minute ditch effort to scare the last few? I have no dog in this fight, just a furloughed UAL dude with too much time on my hands.

1) So if IPA doesn't get enough cards, and the NPRM passes as is, then according to this letter a FQS will be non-flying and no longer a threat to IPA? Right? No more special mgmt reserves, ie recalls commence? Isn't this a win for IPA?

2) If IPA does get enough cards, and NPRM passes as is, a FQS can still become a non-flying position? So again, where is the extra gain for IPA if the NPRM is a done deal.

3) I understand the furlough/seniority issue, but how does this convince a FQS to turn in their card when the IPA has no more power to stop the NPRM than apparently UPS management has?

4) Finally, if this was all kept a secret from FQS types, then exactly which department crafted UPS's reply to the NPRM? The janitors? Why would they want to hire more FQSs if the below is true. AA also responded and said they would need 2200+ more pilots. Can we believe any of these comments verbatim or are they being used for political purposes.

Again, sorry for interruption. I'll go back to eating my popcorn or dealing with our own screwed up saga over at the new UniCal.

Thanks-

KC

Excellent post, you have made some very good points here and showed some original thinking. Apparently, we try to discourage that, it doesn't fit well with the desired narrative.
jungle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2011, 08:21 PM   #5  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Buck92's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: Unknown
Posts: 371
Default

Totally agree - why break our @ss for these guys?! Better for many of us if they don't sign their cards and have to get rehired at the BOTTOM of the seniority list. It's one thing to not rescind the offer (which more than a few would support) but why keep encouraging them? Doesn't seem to buy us anything - except MAYBE the only group of people more bitter than the furloughees (FQS downgraded to line FOs).
Buck92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 05:11 AM   #6  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: DC-8 756/767
Posts: 941
Default

I think part of the reason is that this is a process that started back in 2009, well before the details of the NPRM came out. Right now, it seem to be a gamble by both sides. UPS will fight the NPRM with every ounce of energy they can muster! If for some reason it fails or gets changed in UPS's favor, the process, which we are more than a year into, continues. The IPA wants ALL flying done by IPA members. If they get it done by merging the FQS into the list, or by UPS being forced to make all FQS a no flying position, they don't really care. I personally hope they come up short, because in the end, I feel the FQS job is not going to be around for much longer one way or the other.
UPSFO4LIFE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 08:38 AM   #7  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Jul 2005
Position: Big Brown
Posts: 46
Default Kc135

kc135,
The bottom line is the NPRM is not a "done deal". There is no way to know what it will look like when and if it comes to pass. The IPA intends to end the FQS issue one way or another. The card drive is a way to terminate this problem definitively while keeping all other options open.
turkeydrvr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 11:36 AM   #8  
Line Holder
 
Jonathan E's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 757 FO
Posts: 86
Default

kc135driver,
Briefly:

1) Yes.

2) Obviously, UPS will need some pilots in administrative and manager positions. They just won't need so many if office duties block availability for emergency flying. We still want these positions under our umbrella. No more "yes men" afraid of reprisals. More better operational decisions, maybe? They can flow into the office, they can flow back out onto the line with union protection.

3) This letter isn't the IPA trying to scare our FQSs. They're trying to educate them about how UPS views them. I've watched a few FQSs get very frustrated when Bob Leikites wouldn't listen to presentations, walk out in the middle of a presentation, etc. Necessary changes would not get enacted upon.

What's scary is UPS's view of FQSs in their response: if an FQS can't work all day in an office and fly all night, UPS doesn't want them. I've had trips with FQSs that during layovers, had to interrupt their rest to participate in conference calls on their cellphones. Which in turn, interrupt my rest (sleep) because I can hear them through the hotel walls. This sheepdip has got to end. It will end.

4) These responses to the NPRM come from UPS labor, or Tony Coleman of Frost, Brown and Todd. Take your pick. No FQSs are ever involved with a real decision of importance, ever. Even Rick Barr looks, well, not as chipper as he used to.

I don't know how this will shake out, but the Buffallo crash will change things. Not even Big Brown will get their way and keep their current deal with management emergency flying.

As far as accretion goes, I think the IPA will prevail in one way or another and finally end our "airline within an airline".
Jonathan E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 12:43 PM   #9  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Tigerpilot1995's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: SDF A300 FO
Posts: 441
Default

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.
Tigerpilot1995 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 12:50 PM   #10  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Section Eight's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Position: SDF's finest street corner
Posts: 153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tigerpilot1995 View Post
I suspect the airlines will sue the federal gov't over the "financially burdensome" nature of the NPRM. Never underestimate the power of money.
Until the next crash anyway. I love how UPS cries about how much this will cripple them, They have so much money they dont know what to fo with it except hire new scumbags to do my flying. As if the buffalo crash wasn't a big enough wake up call....
Section Eight is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
 

 
Reply
 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
UPS - FQS Must Read! Deadline approaches.. Capt TedStriker Cargo 3 03-05-2011 02:45 PM
UPS Mechanics 757mech Cargo 24 06-07-2010 07:34 PM
UPS MOU passed no furlough until April 2010!! MD11Simnerd Cargo 84 06-12-2009 01:19 AM
UPS lobbyists FR8K9 Cargo 12 10-06-2008 05:02 AM
New Deal with Teamsters Cujo Cargo 4 10-01-2007 10:08 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:28 PM.


vBulletin® v3.9.3.5, Copyright ©2000-2019, MH Sub I, LLC dba vBulletin
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1