FDX - Why B-767 Instructors?
03-23-2013, 09:22 AM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: leaning to the left
Posts: 4,184
Originally Posted by av8rmike
I'm sure you're correct and I'm wrong. If offered a LOA that kept the individuals whole who built the 757 program from the ground up, and the alternative was a 757 introduction delayed 1 to 2 years and presented with the FACT that every single person on that project was ALREADY entitled to WB pay, well I'm sure the crew force would have shot it down as being completely unreasonable.
And how was your willingness to allow temporary abrogation of seniority rights for those guys more pure hearted than the company's version of until they could hold WB again. Kind of like being a little pregnant... "Well, we're ok with contract language change in this case, but it can't be dependent on keeping you guys whole. Just long enough to get the milk from the cow." Since all were back on WB pay within two years anyway, the company's offer to continue WB pay was exactly the same as what you profess (incorrectly, but I'll be generous and attribute it to a poor memory), it seems that OUR union would have been happy to protect the pay for the instructors who were training OUR crew for their new airplane. Especially since they were the short-sighted morons who couldn't envision a new NB aircraft ever showing up at FedEx and maybe have some pay protections built in for the guys digging the trenches...
Seems BC and DW did pretty well out of their stay there. Rig changed to favor them. Aircraft available to bid without a pay rate. FDA LOA that was super, then crappy, then super and would go senior anyway. Not to mention the thumb in the collective eye of the crew force regarding Age 65. Yep, I remember that regime fondly...
And how was your willingness to allow temporary abrogation of seniority rights for those guys more pure hearted than the company's version of until they could hold WB again. Kind of like being a little pregnant... "Well, we're ok with contract language change in this case, but it can't be dependent on keeping you guys whole. Just long enough to get the milk from the cow." Since all were back on WB pay within two years anyway, the company's offer to continue WB pay was exactly the same as what you profess (incorrectly, but I'll be generous and attribute it to a poor memory), it seems that OUR union would have been happy to protect the pay for the instructors who were training OUR crew for their new airplane. Especially since they were the short-sighted morons who couldn't envision a new NB aircraft ever showing up at FedEx and maybe have some pay protections built in for the guys digging the trenches...
Seems BC and DW did pretty well out of their stay there. Rig changed to favor them. Aircraft available to bid without a pay rate. FDA LOA that was super, then crappy, then super and would go senior anyway. Not to mention the thumb in the collective eye of the crew force regarding Age 65. Yep, I remember that regime fondly...
I have to tell you...Sorry, but I don't think most line pilots lose much sleep over guys talking about getting screwed over their passover pay. Even if they are "digging the trenches".
And by the way...Rig change helped everyone, either directly or indirectly. Even you trench diggers.
I don't hold anything against our instructors. And for the most part, I think they do an outstanding job. But please, don't try to make line dogs feel sorry for them. Trench diggers? Seriously?
03-23-2013, 12:33 PM
#12
Proponent of Hysteria
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: 3B
Posts: 1,052
Although my memory is fuzzy over the years, I have to agree with mike on this one about the 757 instructor cadre. All of them could hold wide body pay and there would have been no harm to the rest of the seniority list had they been able to hold their wide body pay and slide over to the 757. DW and the rest were adamant about them having to bid down to the 757 and then wait to bid back up to the wide body. Congrats MEC, you just caused several guys to lose their passover pay for a couple of years so you could protect seniority for everyone else who had no interest in bidding those instructor positions. Well done.
The current MEC did the same to the backseat flexes who were right seat qual'd in the 72 but hadn't actually bid the right seat. Tch tch. So they were already well senior enough to hold widebody passover pay and were doing so. Who is being hurt if they do makeup in the right seat or fly right seat on their fly months? Nobody. They either "displace" for those fly months a junior right seater or a junior backseater, so why does it matter which one?
These are two instances where the MEC boned the few under the premise of protecting some nebulous seniority boogie man. Total BS in both cases, everybody had the opportunity to bid what those pilots had bid.
Don't even want to get started with BC, DW and the two former block reps of mine who bid the 777 without a pay rate. Thanks for taking care of yourselves while pontificating that you were trying to protect seniority.
The current MEC did the same to the backseat flexes who were right seat qual'd in the 72 but hadn't actually bid the right seat. Tch tch. So they were already well senior enough to hold widebody passover pay and were doing so. Who is being hurt if they do makeup in the right seat or fly right seat on their fly months? Nobody. They either "displace" for those fly months a junior right seater or a junior backseater, so why does it matter which one?
These are two instances where the MEC boned the few under the premise of protecting some nebulous seniority boogie man. Total BS in both cases, everybody had the opportunity to bid what those pilots had bid.
Don't even want to get started with BC, DW and the two former block reps of mine who bid the 777 without a pay rate. Thanks for taking care of yourselves while pontificating that you were trying to protect seniority.
03-23-2013, 01:10 PM
#13
Part Time Employee
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
Posts: 1,918
Originally Posted by FXDX
Although my memory is fuzzy over the years, I have to agree with mike on this one about the 757 instructor cadre. All of them could hold wide body pay and there would have been no harm to the rest of the seniority list had they been able to hold their wide body pay and slide over to the 757. DW and the rest were adamant about them having to bid down to the 757 and then wait to bid back up to the wide body. Congrats MEC, you just caused several guys to lose their passover pay for a couple of years so you could protect seniority for everyone else who had no interest in bidding those instructor positions. Well done.
The current MEC did the same to the backseat flexes who were right seat qual'd in the 72 but hadn't actually bid the right seat. Tch tch. So they were already well senior enough to hold widebody passover pay and were doing so. Who is being hurt if they do makeup in the right seat or fly right seat on their fly months? Nobody. They either "displace" for those fly months a junior right seater or a junior backseater, so why does it matter which one?
These are two instances where the MEC boned the few under the premise of protecting some nebulous seniority boogie man. Total BS in both cases, everybody had the opportunity to bid what those pilots had bid.
Don't even want to get started with BC, DW and the two former block reps of mine who bid the 777 without a pay rate. Thanks for taking care of yourselves while pontificating that you were trying to protect seniority.
The current MEC did the same to the backseat flexes who were right seat qual'd in the 72 but hadn't actually bid the right seat. Tch tch. So they were already well senior enough to hold widebody passover pay and were doing so. Who is being hurt if they do makeup in the right seat or fly right seat on their fly months? Nobody. They either "displace" for those fly months a junior right seater or a junior backseater, so why does it matter which one?
These are two instances where the MEC boned the few under the premise of protecting some nebulous seniority boogie man. Total BS in both cases, everybody had the opportunity to bid what those pilots had bid.
Don't even want to get started with BC, DW and the two former block reps of mine who bid the 777 without a pay rate. Thanks for taking care of yourselves while pontificating that you were trying to protect seniority.
1. I don't recall ever seeing a bid for 757 Instructors!
2. I don't like the idea of individuals negotiating a "deal" with the company. If you want to modify the CBA it has to be done through proper channels.
03-23-2013, 01:24 PM
#15
Organizational Learning
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: Directly behind the combiner
Posts: 4,948
Originally Posted by Mister Nobody
Not to hijack the post but . . . combined list for RSV, VLT, and DRFT but not bid line adjustments = NO VOTE!
Now back to your regularly scheduled conversation.
.
03-23-2013, 01:32 PM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,838
Originally Posted by MaxKts
1. I don't recall ever seeing a bid for 757 Instructors!
2. I don't like the idea of individuals negotiating a "deal" with the company. If you want to modify the CBA it has to be done through proper channels.
2. I don't like the idea of individuals negotiating a "deal" with the company. If you want to modify the CBA it has to be done through proper channels.
I've never understood indefinite passover pay in the Schoolhouse to begin with.
If a line pilot wants $$ over Quality of life he Bids it, and takes the $$ for the reduced quality of life. If he wants Good QOL he chooses to stay Senior and forfeits or delays the Upgrade and makes less. Thats Senority.
No wonder we have folks that make a 25 year career in the Schoolhouse.
03-23-2013, 04:01 PM
#18
Part Time Employee
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Dispersing Green House Gasses on a Global Basis
Posts: 1,918
Originally Posted by Mister Nobody
Not to hijack the post but . . . combined list for RSV, VLT, and DRFT but not bid line adjustments = NO VOTE!
Now back to your regularly scheduled conversation.
Now back to your regularly scheduled conversation.
Originally Posted by Mister Nobody
Thanks for correcting me but, it's still a NO.
And, what are you willing to give up to get it?
03-23-2013, 07:20 PM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
Originally Posted by Mister Nobody
Not to hijack the post but . . . combined list for RSV, VLT, and DRFT but not bid line adjustments = NO VOTE!
Why you would want 767's guys picking off prime 757 flying during the VIEW/ADD window is beyond me.
Is this some grand plan to let 767 guys strip off as much good 757 flying as possible?
Last edited by Gunter; 03-23-2013 at 07:43 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
