That statement does not make any sense to me? How does any advice or recommendation change people's rights to get onto the FDA passover program? If you are insinuating that fewer people will try and game the system then the 500 thousand guys have even a better chance to go to the FDA because they have to bid it and will have less competition, right?

If you want to go to t he FDA, bid it, pretty simple. If you get denied the award the CBA provides a remedy for that scenario. As TonyC says, "know your CBA", that includes turning down an award, but I read the Scheduling advice as geared toward those who want to go to the FDA and just threw in a recommendation for those not considering actually going, and those people I have a feeling have a plan in place and know the CBA better than someone just simply bidding to go to a seat. YMMV.

 

Just a guess, but they might be sending out a lot of emails to explain things that are being done that are legal per the CBA? We may not like the excuse or way the Company is handling it but they are following the CBA nonetheless.

I personally spend more time on my monthly bid than time on my system bid. Putting together a list of aircraft, seat, domicile and possibly percentage bidding that you want to fly is not that difficult and most of us have been doing that sort of thing our whole career.

 

It doesn't change the rights at all. I just think the email from ALPA only painted one side of the picture and emphasized only a portion of the contract. They didn't fully explain how you could be entitled to FEPP, and still say no before receiving any monies.

I was not insinuating that at all. My point was that the 500 thousand number guys currently on the list knew the contract very well and have used it to their advantage. I do not know if the bid it knowing they would never have to go or if they truly wanted to go at the time. My point is that I believe there are enough pilots that want to go and therefore the pilots towards the bottom of the FEPP list will never have to go.

I just think ALPA did not paint the whole picture.

 

It is quite telling that you considered the possibility that those were the Chairman's actual words, even to the point of going to check them against the original. I had hoped that they would be so far-fetched that you would instantly recognize the sarcasm.

Sarcasm loses its effectiveness when it has to be explained.

I'm sorry if I confused you.






.

 

Well, Tony, for you the advice is not required. You are fully versed on the rules and make excellent decisions when protecting your career. (No sarcasm)

Besides YOU, there are 4600 other pilots at FedEx. Not all of them can fly a trip with you and get edumacated. Many are very inexperienced in how things work or, quite frankly, aren't as good at making life decisions. Unlike you some ARE seeking advice. I suspect a large number need advice and don't even know it.

So....Instead of watching a few bid blindly the LEADERSHIP is trying to keep them out of trouble with simple advice. Those that only like to read the cliff notes will get the most benefit. I like that we are trying to take care of our own. If they are smart enough to effectively work out their options, they are smart enough to know the advice given is merely a sure way to stay out of trouble.

Even those who don't give a hoot about them should be happy advice coming from Poplar and Kirby may prevent a large expenditure of union funds defending those who don't think out the risks.

We get it Tony. If you were MEC Chairman you would marginalize all committee Chairs and be the expert on everything.

 

Admittedly, I have often disagreed with Tony. That said, I very much appreciate his sharing of knowledge on the FEPP situation. I read the contract, but the practical application is difficult at times. I'm a pilot, not a lawyer, and this thing can be almost impossible to interpret at times..

Despite what the union wants, I will be bidding the FDA for PAY PURPOSES. If my turn comes up to go, I'll think about it when/if it happens. We've had some guys on the list for years and they've probably made 200-300k from this. And I won't feel bad about it. The company didn't feel bad when they took a well meaning contract clause and decided to turn it upside down ( 4.A.2b.). It's just business. They don't mind changing the way they dealt with accepted fares to save money. Again, it's just business.

I don't see a real downside to bidding the FDA. If they see 100 guys on the list, it may make them discover the ease of a single pay rate or the viability of the FDAs. It may also encourage them to make the deal better, not seek witch hunts, and to remember the value of good will with their pilots...

 

It's quite telling that someone who threatened me with legal action from a misquote would so carelessly throw words around.

Your selective memory, revisionist history and awkward spin on message lines reveals much.

 

I don't know of anyone in the union who doesn't want you to bid the way you want to bid. As long as you are of the right frame of mind to do so.

You're absolutely right. It's just business. Any hint from a manager that you are gaming the system should trigger a discussion about 4a2b implementation, 727 SO excess bid meant to replace a vacancy bid, accepted fares and various scheduling shenanigans that involve lying and deceit. When they game the system they say, "A contract is a contract". That should be our response too.

 

The Union does not want you to not bid an FDA, in fact ALPA does like higher dues, right? The advice is meant to help people avoid a situation that could be troublesome to them and their families if not completely thought through.

If some decide not to bid it for those reasons then that is even better for you. You will have less people in your way to either get the actual seat or you will be on passover sooner with less people in front of you on the virtual training letter, bonus for you!

 

What's the troublesome part? Payback? You have the contractual right to choose to change your mind if you want. What's the downside?