FDX - When would you ...
04-11-2013 | 07:16 AM
#101
Part Time Employee
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,918
Likes: 0
From: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
I said "We are all screwed" as a sarcastic response to your doomsday scenarios!
As Redeye points out - everything you are proposing could happen - with or without this LOA.
Still waiting on an answer to my previous question!
04-11-2013 | 08:40 AM
#102
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
Likes: 0
Yes, I do know what a soft parameter is.
Do you know what a simile is?
The Scheduling Committee Chairman is being given the discretion to include B-767 flying in the B-757 bidpack, and we've been given no justification as to why that might ever be appropriate. He can decide unilaterally when it's OK to abrogate seniority by placing wide-body flying in a narrow-body bidpack. If it makes his job of building bid period packages easier ... well ... Oh, well. I stand by my statement. Seniority is reduced to something that can be waived.
I seem to recall some people being upset by a certain city purity letter. Maybe that was a false memory ...
.
Simile
noun
1. a figure of speech in which two unlike things are explicitly compared, as in “she is like a rose.”
City Purity letter gave something to the company that we previously had and its existence was witheld until after the TA vote. Not a good comparison either.
This is a schizophrenic crew force. Some lament that the 757 bidpack may have no 767 flying in it and others worry 767 flying may end up in the 757 bidpack.
Union leaders make unilateral decisions all the time. In the not to distant past...Even after a poll the MEC commissioned tells them to do something leaders decided not to follow the resulting guidance. Heads should have rolled but did not. Not immediately anyway. I can understand being gun shy after that but the MEC has changed out since then.
I think you want all 767 related flying in the 767 bidpack to, in the long run, maximize the number of 767 bidpack crew members. You think the SIG Chairman may make decisions that won't work toward that goal. But isn't there a mechanism to make sure all goes well? A check to make sure one time waivers do not decrease the number of 767 bidding crew members?
We'll have to vote in MEC members that will make sure the SIG Chairman does the job right. I haven't seen evidence that is currently an issue and do not share your fear.
Last edited by Gunter; 04-11-2013 at 09:03 AM.
04-11-2013 | 09:21 AM
#103
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,047
Likes: 0
From: 767 FO
There you go again! I never said you said "I am screwed" or "we are all screwed"!
I said "We are all screwed" as a sarcastic response to your doomsday scenarios!
As Redeye points out - everything you are proposing could happen - with or without this LOA.
Still waiting on an answer to my previous question!
I said "We are all screwed" as a sarcastic response to your doomsday scenarios!
As Redeye points out - everything you are proposing could happen - with or without this LOA.
Still waiting on an answer to my previous question!
04-11-2013 | 09:29 AM
#104
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,047
Likes: 0
From: 767 FO
Oh the Horror, than we won't need an FDA in Europe anymore and no more FDA LOA complaints. And then your MEM 757 manning will go up again 
BTW that could happen if you got your way too with a combined 75/76 Bidpack. But then you would lose all the Nice Bid DDH's to Europe. Either way we can't stop it if that is what the Company has in store.
Seriously, They could Conceivably Close CGN altogether and fly Europe like UPS does. They could do that in HKG too for that matter. If that were to happen, I'd rather have all that flying in a WB bid pack. But then we will hear how the Union screwed all the FDA guys (again).....by allowing the Base to be closed. It will be DW's fault
LAG I get your issue (sort of), but Contractually all any of us rate each month is 68 and 85 hours(4 week/5 week). Anything above that is at the Company's discretion and due to Seniority.
Your issue isn't really a separate Bid packs. It is with our current Line Guarantees and Spreads and Caps. If we could get these issues tightened and spread to be more fair across the board, then that would fix your concern. If we stop hiring indefinitley and begin to park Wide bodies sooner than later, excessed Pilots will flow down to the 757. Even worse if the Company decides to park all A300's and MD10s sooner than they announced...it would be 2008-9 all over again. Even if the 75/76 was combined, there is nothing to stop the Company from over manning the lower paying seat and when a seat is over manned, the BLGs are generally lower. Combined Bid pack or not.
Personally, assuming LOA passing, I predict the 767 Reserve guys getting shafted more than the 757 Guys. I guess we will wait and see.
BTW that could happen if you got your way too with a combined 75/76 Bidpack. But then you would lose all the Nice Bid DDH's to Europe. Either way we can't stop it if that is what the Company has in store.Seriously, They could Conceivably Close CGN altogether and fly Europe like UPS does. They could do that in HKG too for that matter. If that were to happen, I'd rather have all that flying in a WB bid pack. But then we will hear how the Union screwed all the FDA guys (again).....by allowing the Base to be closed. It will be DW's fault
LAG I get your issue (sort of), but Contractually all any of us rate each month is 68 and 85 hours(4 week/5 week). Anything above that is at the Company's discretion and due to Seniority.
Your issue isn't really a separate Bid packs. It is with our current Line Guarantees and Spreads and Caps. If we could get these issues tightened and spread to be more fair across the board, then that would fix your concern. If we stop hiring indefinitley and begin to park Wide bodies sooner than later, excessed Pilots will flow down to the 757. Even worse if the Company decides to park all A300's and MD10s sooner than they announced...it would be 2008-9 all over again. Even if the 75/76 was combined, there is nothing to stop the Company from over manning the lower paying seat and when a seat is over manned, the BLGs are generally lower. Combined Bid pack or not.
Personally, assuming LOA passing, I predict the 767 Reserve guys getting shafted more than the 757 Guys. I guess we will wait and see.
With a combined bid pack BLG are more uniform across the bid pack and open time is available to all.
I have no problem with them closing CGN. But if CGN is manned for the scheduled flying and they give some of the the scheduled flying to someone else that makes CGN a reserve base with a 68 hour RLG. As you say, perfectly legal, I would just want to know before I bid it.
As I said when this makes a difference 2 years from now, I will probably have moved on.
04-11-2013 | 10:28 AM
#106
Part Time Employee
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,918
Likes: 0
From: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
If the company is replacing other WB aircraft with the 76 and the 76 is combined into the 75 bidpack - how many pilots will be competing for those vacation and training slots you claim are protected by our two tier payscale? Everyone except the 77 on NB pay for vacation and training - yeah lets take that concessionary deal it sounds so much better than what has been offered!
04-11-2013 | 10:55 AM
#107
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,047
Likes: 0
From: 767 FO
How about the difference a combined bidpack would make in 5 years from now? You know, the one that includes a majority of the crewforce working at NB pay except when they actually fly a 76!
If the company is replacing other WB aircraft with the 76 and the 76 is combined into the 75 bidpack - how many pilots will be competing for those vacation and training slots you claim are protected by our two tier payscale? Everyone except the 77 on NB pay for vacation and training - yeah lets take that concessionary deal it sounds so much better than what has been offered!
If the company is replacing other WB aircraft with the 76 and the 76 is combined into the 75 bidpack - how many pilots will be competing for those vacation and training slots you claim are protected by our two tier payscale? Everyone except the 77 on NB pay for vacation and training - yeah lets take that concessionary deal it sounds so much better than what has been offered!
04-11-2013 | 11:18 AM
#109
Part Time Employee
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,918
Likes: 0
From: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
BECAUSE - The company wouldn't agree to it! Is that simple enough for you???
04-11-2013 | 11:22 AM
#110
Thread Starter
Organizational Learning
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,948
Likes: 0
From: Directly behind the combiner
Union leaders make unilateral decisions all the time. In the not to distant past...Even after a poll the MEC commissioned tells them to do something leaders decided not to follow the resulting guidance. Heads should have rolled but did not. Not immediately anyway. I can understand being gun shy after that but the MEC has changed out since then.
.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
