FDX - Think Before you Vote
 

I do not know this captain but after reading what he submitted to Steve to be posted in his JetFlyer email I thought it was worth passing along.

For two seconds I beg you to look past the 3% hourly rate increase and read the hidden details being included in this TA. This is a FULL 31 section ratification (compensation only being one) with some serious changes with very lasting effects.

TA NOTES part 1
Consider these points in the TA before voting. question your representatives

SECTION 3D2 - International Override
The international override pay remains the same even though the trips
are now much longer and the introduction of the LRN Checklist (no longer
named ETOPS LRN) duties have increased exponentially.

Think this only affects the B-777? FedEx's comments on the NPRM include
a cost estimate of $30.7 million for "Adding crew bunk to MD11/MD10-30
Fleet: For Max duty limits, 41 MD11's / 17 MD10-30's will require the
crew rest module."

Section 14C - Reserve pilot sick leave

This section speaks of a "mini RLG" though the only definition of that
term is in section 14c,i and states:
"A pilot holding a line comprised entirely of R-days or holding a mini-
RLG consisting of a block(s) of R-days and who is sick for all such R-
days shall be compensated his RLG/mini-RLG and shall have his sick leave
reduced by such RLG/mini-RLG."

Mini RLG can be, and I'm betting will be, interpreted to mean any block
of R days and is a give back from our current contract which requires a
pilot to be sick for the entire month before his full reserve BLG is
deducted from his sick bank.

SECTION 18 - WITNESS AND REPRESENTATION

Section 18 A1f allows the MEC Chairman to designate anyone he chooses to
be removed from duty with pay...up to 10 pilots not designated as
officers, committee chairs or designated to any assigned duty in the union:

18 A "and with 30 days written notice prior to the beginning of the
first affected bid period, the following shall be removed from flying as
provided in Section 18.B.1.b. or c.:"

18A1f "other pilots designated by the MEC Chairman; provided, however,
the total number of pilots removed under Section 18.A.1. shall not
exceed 10, except with the Company's agreement."

18D1 also allows the MEC Chairman to elect whether these people must
remain current.

18D1 "other pilots designated by the MEC Chairman under Section 18.A.
1.f., may elect" not to maintain currency."

What happened to "Line Qualified" pilots and check and balance? Maybe
you trust the current MEC, but do you know who's going to have this
power in the future?

SECTION 19 INVESTIGATION AND DISCIPLINE

Section 19C redefines the length that an Advisory Letter or Discipline
Letter can remain in a pilot's file or be used in consideration of
disciplinary action. Our current contract limits the use of such a letter to:
"up to 2 years after the receipt of the most recent letter of warning."

The TA changes that limitation:

Section 19C - "C. Consideration of Prior Disciplinary Action
An Advisory Letter or a Disciplinary Letter (e.g., a letter of warning,
suspension, or termination) may be used to establish that a pilot was
given notice of a policy,
procedure or work rule, and/or that discipline could result from future
violations of
such policy, procedure or work rule, no matter the date of issuance of
such Letter."

... a pilot who receives such a letter may be haunted by it for the
entire length of his employment at FedEx. A huge give back to the
company who's recent history shows a propensity to prosecute the most
minor infraction to the fullest extent of the current contract and
company policy.

SECTION 22 SENIORITY

Did those of you who were hired under probation for a year enjoy that
particular chapter of your career that you believe it should be extended
for our new hires for an additional two to three months?

SECTION 22 E1 -Probationary Pilots E. 1.
"A pilot hired on or after February 28, 2011, shall be employed
on a probationary basis on his DOH, and continuing for the first 365 days
of accumulated active service as a pilot with the Company following the
check ride/qualification event that establishes his base month for recurrent
training/continuing qualification."

SECTION 23 Non-Flying Employment Opportunities
Section 23D states that: "a furloughed pilot may not work in a non-
flying position with the Company at the same time that he is receiving
furlough pay as provided in Section 23.E1."

Our current contract states in Section 23.E5 that "If a furloughed pilot
is offered and accepts non-flying employment with the Company, the total
furlough to which the pilot is entitled shall be reduced by the
compensation he received for his non-flying employment during the bid
period(s) with respect to which the pilot in entitled to furlough pay,
as provided in Section 23.E1"

The translation? If the Company offers non-flying employment to a
furloughed pilot he must purchase that position by giving up his
furlough pay. He may, in the TA, delay employment until after he has
received all his furlough pay, but I'm betting any offer from the
Company will come with a time limit on the offer.

Section 31 EFFECT ON PRIOR AGREEMENTS, EFFECTIVE DATE AND DURATION
This section is probably the most important section we all need to read
and understand.

Starting with 31.A, it states that:

"This Agreement is the full and complete agreement between the parties
concerning rates of pay, rules and working conditions of the pilots."
Section 31.B states:

"Upon the effective date of this Agreement, all outstanding notices of
reopening exchanged between the parties pursuant to Section 6, Title I
of the Railway Labor Act, as amended are fully resolved."
Despite what you may believe you have heard from the MEC or any person,
this constitutes a "full and complete" contract - period.
This closes all Section 6 negotiations. The term bridge is a misnomer.
The MEC would have you believe that the day they decide to open
negotiations again with the Company we start right where we left off.
Read those two statements again along with this note in the letter to
John Gustafson:

RE: Midterm Discussions and Status of Administrative TA's in Future
Section 6 Bargaining:

"As will be set forth more formally in the duration clause, the effect
of this new agreement will be that all outstanding Section 6 notices
shall be without prejudice to either party serving future Section 6
notices on the same or similar topics, pursuant to the schedule set
forth in the duration clause, and without prejudice to voluntary
discussions between the parties outside the procedures of Section 6
during the term of this Agreement with respect to topics raised in prior
Section 6 notices."
Translation: Unless the Company, out of the goodness of their heart,
agrees that any discussions we have in the interim, or any agreements
reached on any sections are resolved, we start contract negotiations
from the same point as we did in October 2010. The difference is we will
have lost 2 years of momentum, most likely the Pro-Labor Administration
and NMB we currently have and enter a time of negotiations having given
up the ability to negotiate FDA, work rules, pay, retirement,
discipline, per diem, and other very important sections during a time
period when the Company is hiring to expand and replace retiring pilots
as they will already have done that.

Another thing to consider:

If this TA is voted in, the membership has no future vote on whether we
restart negotiations in 2012, or for that matter anytime in the future
as the contract renews without change each year unless the MEC forces
contract negotiations.
I predict that if this TA is voted in, we will not have another contract
for 4 years. That means our current contract, with a few small tidbits
from the company, becomes a 9 year contract! There is no second chance
to vote for new negotiations folks. This is it.

Captain XXXX

REALLY:confused:
Wow, talk about spreading false information. This is beyond belief! There are some valid reasons to vote no for this TA as brought up by many on APC. But this is down right wrong. Is the factual information not enough for you? You really need to address the falsehoods you are putting into the discussion! :eek:

I liked the Jetflyer article by the guy that thought we were going to strike if we didn't approve the TA. It was pretty funny. Really? Wouldn't that just put us in normal negotiations, just like where will be in one year anyway? Good stuff..

It is amazing how out of touch, or sheeple, or whatever you call it, that some of our guys are. I am in disbelief!

I personally would not have posted his name.

Guys he may not have gotten everything right, but this section on mini-RLG and sick leave is pretty significant. I just re-read the TA and it looks like a pretty big giveback to me.

This has my vote for the dumbest post of the year.

For starters, the longer the trip the more hours of international override you accrue. Duh???

And secondly, there's nothing in the LRN checklist (International for dummies) that you shouldn't already be doing.

Put down the USA today and pay a little attention next crossing.

FDX1,

You claim this statement to be a falsehood but you do not explain what is false about it. What is so "down right wrong" with the above text? The math looks pretty accurate to me.

If this Full 31 section TA (FDA LOA) passes in Mar'11, and in Mar'12 MEC decides (not you) that the 2nd year is exercised the new expiration date is Mar'13. Two years of negiatiations after that and then we will have our REAL full contract in the summer of 2015. So from 2006 (when our current contract went into effect) to 2015 is 9 YEARS!!!!

:confused: Not sure what your missing, or are you still staring at that 3% raise :p

O.K. Purpletail I'll explain:

1)"If this TA is voted in, the membership has no future vote on whether we
restart negotiations in 2012, or for that matter anytime in the future
as the contract renews without change each year unless the MEC forces
contract negotiations."
SS has explained numerous times that he views this as a 12 month deal with an optional 12 month extension. No where can you show me language that the contract will "renew without change each year unless the MEC forces contract negotiations". This TA is only good for the next 12 months and then we can be in Section 6 negotiations if WE choose. That is an amendable date of FEB 2012! BUT if we decide to take the next 3% raise based on whatever for 12 more months then we have an amendable date of FEB 2013! THAT'S IT. That my friend doesn't require anyones vote. Not you, me, the MEC, or the Company! This is not a contract in perpetuity like the letter falsely proclaimed.


2) "I predict that if this TA is voted in, we will not have another contract
for 4 years. That means our current contract, with a few small tidbits
from the company, becomes a 9 year contract! There is no second chance
to vote for new negotiations folks. This is it."
This TA will become your "new contract", call it a bridge, a bandaid, whatever it is a "new contract". Meaning new start date, and an amendable date. It's the entire contract, not bits and pieces. It doesn't matter what sections were changed or not. So this can be a 1 year or a 2 year contract! How long the next negotiation takes is up to us. So how you get 9 year contract is beyond me. Do you mean it will take 7 YEARS of NEGOTIATIONS after this contract is amendable to sign a new contract? How do you come to that conclusion, past history? That wont help your argument there will it? Basically you are forwarding a very extreme, even unfathomable statement. So if you say 9 year contract, well then I think we have a 1 year and 9 day contract! Yep 9 days to complete an entire re-write of our Contract...every section even the stuff on Management Pilots! Pretty outrageous wouldn't you agree? Well that's how this letter from Captain Thometz reads, like someone out of touch with the reality of the TA and the positives and negatives that are clear enough for each of us to understand and discuss. But how can you have an honest discussion when the facts are so distorted or misinterpreted by you with your post? I can have an open and honest discussion if you want to talk about the 6% raise or the monthly housing allowance for the FDA or the per diem rates or anything else that is part of this TA, not innuendo, falsehoods, and far flung scenarios.


So that is what is "down right wrong" with this section of his letter! Sorry but words matter and the facts are important. We're all intelligent enough to discuss the finer points on either side of this TA, but lets try not to distort the issues.

Facts Not Fiction
 

This guy was at the afternoon hubturn meeting that I attended. He had placed a double sided yellow sheet of paper in each chair with most of these same points. Once the meeting started he tried to dominate it by trying to promote some of these abstract questions. I specifically remember the one about the "mini-RLG" and how we have given back the use of sick leave on reserve. The NC specifically stated that this does not apply to "R" lines, only to a "mini-RLG" that you could receive on a custom or secondary line. They said this is the current practice that we have been living under the current CBA. He was given the "FACTS" last week yet is still spewing this misinformation. I am all for listening to different opinions and learning more but when you try to stir the pot with misinformation you really have to question a persons credibility. I guess there is a reason that the National Enquirer still sells magazines.