Junior AA CA right around late '98 hire.

Yes, we have pay protection for sequence cancellation. However you have to go into what's called "recovery obligation" in which crew skeds may assign you a trip during the footprint of the cancelled trip, which you must accept in order to get the pay protection. Could be a simple turn vs your cancelled 4 day....whatever, you still get the full pay. Sometimes you get a trip, sometimes you don't. It's not perfect but it's an improvement.

 

What? Is this a fact? Your trip rig is 1:3.5? That equates to 6:51 for every 24hr period. Which is BETTER than FDX trip rig of 1:3.75.

 

What happens if you agree to 'recovery obligation' but crew skeds doesn't assign you a trip?

Still paid?

How long during your 'recovery obligation' does crew skeds have to assign you a trip?

 

1. Yes, you're still pay protected even with no trip offer.

2. Domestically, you're on the hook until 4hrs after your original sequence ended or 0159, whichever is later. Intl, on the hook until 30hrs after your original sequence ended.

 

The 1:3.5 is a TAFB rig. We get 1 min of pay and credit for every 3.5mins away from base. But it's definitely not a min day credit, as we have some 3-day trips that have 24hr layovers that pay a minimum of 11 and change.

 

Thanks to the Enron debacle, and the subsequent changes to federal securities laws, most notably the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we will never see retro pay ... it's that simple.

Retroactive Pay, or pay rate increases retroactive to some point in the past, would require The Company to go back and re-accomplish corporate tax documents for those years where the pay adjustments are made.

There's nothing legally preventing them from paying the money equal to what retroactive pay would have been, or from contributing to retirement funds and other compensation as if the pay rates had been retroactive, but they will not consider it compensation credited to a previous year.

It will probably be left to the Association to determine how best to divide whatever sum is agreed upon to substitute for retroactive pay. It's up to US (our Block Reps, our Negotiating Committee, and we voters) to determine how big that sum is, and how it is to be fairly distributed. As for distribution, I believe that the closer we can get to what Retroactive Pay would have been, the better. As for the amount, I believe we should accept no less than what Retro Pay would have been. Considering that we'll be hit harder by the tax man, and we've not enjoyed the time value of the money, the amount should be much larger.


But in the end, I don't care what it's called, as long as it's cash or money.






.

 

I have some numbers showing my own advancement on our ALPA seniority calculator. Because some of those pilots above have already bailed, lost medicals, etc the numbers I have a lower. ANY Fedex pilot that is an ALPA member (what...all but maybe 30 now?) can look at these on the FDX MEC website.

These are as of today...with pilots ahead of me in seniority retiring. There may be more behind me in seniority retiring but I am a 2002 hire. I am looking at healthy advancement, but it looks to be more like 125-150 a year for most of us 2002-2007 hires. The numbers above MIGHT be accurate for a new hire's projected advancement.

Date Projected leaving
2/24/2017 99
2/24/2018 126
2/24/2019 152
2/24/2020 126
2/24/2021 162
2/24/2022 182
2/24/2023 209
2/24/2024 177
2/24/2025 200
2/24/2026 169
2/24/2027 194
2/24/2028 146
2/24/2029 152

Its good advancement, but its nots exponential like at some of the legacies right now. My bigger concern is the very low hiring (as LAG pointed out) and the fact we seem to be getting by with less pilots. Even as we lop of the top, a new hire needs to consider how many are hired behind them and not just how many are retiring as they look at their projected relative seniority. Our bottom 10% really haven't moved up that much the last few years. When we finally do hire again, that should change....but no idea when that will finally happen. Conversely, that new hire at UAL or DAL is getting 800-1000 behind them in 12 months, getting their domicile of choice, and holding a line in many cases before they are off probation.

I'm not bashing where I am, and its been the best place to be the last 10-15 years. New hires, however, are looking at options they haven't had since the 90s at a cross section of airlines. Interesting times...

 

The same 116hr TAFB trip, with a 1:3.5 trip rig at AA, would pay 33:08. AND, they now have a higher hourly rate.

 

I think Fedex is going to find it difficult to hire quality pilots. Company is shooting itself in the foot - big time. Over the last couple of years everyone and their brother wanted a spot at FDX. More than one reason - not the least of which few others hiring (but great pay, benefits, etc. all factored in of course). However, over the last 6-12 months as the legacies have ramped up hiring - big time - and contracts have started to recover from the bad days of the 2000's - only ONE guy (out of many, mostly military guys that were keeping in touch) has expressed interest in still coming to FDX. They all have decided to move on to the legacies - for many of the reasons stated throughout this thread - perhaps rapid advancement being the foremost. And I'm not recommending to any of them to wait on FDX either, I would have a few years ago. If this company does not get its act together and soon - its going to be left in the dust hiring nothing but the left overs who for one reason or another didn't get a legacy job. The pendulum has a way of swinging and right now FDX is getting very far on the back side of the power curve....

 

dozerf22,

Interesting comments. Thanks for your perspective and innuendo about FedEx's ability to "hire quality pilots" and "hiring nothing but the left overs." The fact is that for some strange reason, these less than "quality pilots" and the "left overs" seem to be able to handle the job quite well, thank you very much. I'm not singling you out for your comments, as these types of thoughts have been posted by many before you. What I'd like to see is a list of all US commercial aviation accidents, over the past 15 years, along with a list of the backgrounds of the accident pilots, to verify that these less-than-perfect aviators, are in fact the main cause of the majority of accidents. Personally, I don't believe we'd see that fact, but I've been wrong before. There was that time back in '87 when I thought I was wrong, but I was actually right, but that's another matter.