FDX school house cash
 

Anyone have a link to the school house cash article? Couldn't find it in a search here or the ALPA site

Recent thread on Jetflyers, search training. The PDF is on the ALPA website on the scheduling committee page.

FDX ALPA Scheduling Committee page, SIG Notes & Archive link, right side - Scheduling Matters Articles.

Also a file on the Jetflyers FB page.

Thanks, I'll try the jetflyers. I could only find a signotes link no archives and only listed last three signotes
Committees L-Z » Scheduling Committee » SIG NOTES
Search
SIG Notes Maximize
April 2017 SIG Notes
Read More...

March 2017 SIG Notes - 2/6/17
Read More...

February 2017 SIG Notes - 1/9/17
Read More...

It's there. You have to be logged in to see it.

Thanks..... found it. Still one answered question. Is there a pay advantage to doing all the LMS before you show for training or is it better to not submit final one until after training starts?

Do you mean tri annual or the stuff younhave to do for itu? You dont get paid extra for itu lms, it's part of the course and built into the timeline. For tri annual if you go over a pay change (anniversary or date of signing bump) it makes sense to submit it during the month you get the pay bump.

I was talking ITU. If you complete that ITU LMS before class starts wouldn't it be paid as if it was tri annual?

Nope


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nope. tri annual and ITU LMS are different. ITU LMS is part of your pay only because it's part of the curriculum.

the "School house cash" article is great but hasn't been corrected for the new contract. It is MOSTLY correct.

Must be signed in.

http://fdx.alpa.org/LinkClick.aspx?f...%3d&tabid=3068

Sorry to go "90 right", but can anyone help with the process to join "Jetflyers"? I do not do Facebook if it's the only avenue. Thanks in advance.

It's FB only. There is/used to be an email group but it kind of got phased out when FB came along.

The advantage to doing the school house LMS prior to showing is an opportunity to learn the systems, better prepare yourself for your transition.

For sure... just wondered if there was any benefit in hitting that last button to be complete before or after start of training.

Instructors also check to see if you have completed it.

They allow you access a few weeks prior, but for my last (767) upgrade I was in the middle of trying to sell off 4 cars, rent out my house, close out a tax audit on my business, get a daughter accepted and off to college, etc etc. My personal life was a wreck--nothing BAD, just crazy busy before moving 8000+ miles away. Day 1 of class I had two pro instructors come up and say "hey...are you OKAY? Can you hang with this? Are you READY?" since I had only done about 60% of the LMS.

I assured them that my LMS not being done was a by-product of a very hectic life, and not a sign of indifference, and not to worry about it because by the end of week 1 I'd nail their test and would be just fine. Having done 3 previous programs at FDX I felt pretty confident in how I learn, and I would catch up very quickly with the online training. As expected, the entire course went just fine. My first week of class I probably had to burn time at night than I wanted catching up on the LMS, but got it done and had zero issues in training.

That said, if I HAD struggled on a test, PV, or MV etc I'm pretty sure it would have been pointed out that I showed up for class with those things incomplete. That probably would have painted a picture of me as a student that I probably wouldn't like if I had to do a TRB. As a guy who taught for 10 years in an F-15 schoolhouse I can understand their concern about a guy showing up unprepared, and I wouldn't have liked my approach either had I been the instructor. In this case, I highly recommend doing what I say, not what I did...

What I did do once complete with the program was write up a pretty detailed end of course critique. I suggested LMS be available 60-90 days out, not just (I think) 30 we had a the time. 30 days isn't much for someone moving to an FDA with the long list of things that gotta get done. I have no idea if they made any changes (and I seriously doubt they did) but I tried.

Point is--if at all possible--get it done. They are watching. And its more fun to go out drinking and dining week 1 with your sim partner than doing LMS cleanup.

I did the LMS when the schedule said to do it. Not one bit early. I did study phase 1's and ops limits before Day 1, but the LMS I did on their schedule. In my case recency of information is more important, particularly since the systems phase is pure regurgitation. YMMV

None of my instructors said a word.

LMS is turned on 30 days prior for credit.

You can audit any LMS course at anytime.

I knew I was more than likely to go through at least the systems ones twice so I started those outside of the 30 day window and watched them again once they were turned on for credit.

"The Company" has been on a crusade for many years to reduce the training footprint. Substituting computer-based training for classroom training is one way to reduce the number of training days, but it's not such a great way to teach, much less learn. Even so, the time allotted for accomplishing the LMS is built in to the schedule, and that's all you get paid for. You don't get paid for doing any LMS early, and you don't get paid for any extra hours you actually spend doing it above what is scheduled.


The Company counts on us to do whatever we can to avoid training failure, which usually motivates us to do that LMS early. Most of us require that because it actually takes more time just to view it than what is allotted in the schedule, and it definitely takes more time to view, digest, and review the material sufficiently to accomplish the learning that used to be achieved through the classroom instruction.


I'm not discouraging anyone from doing the LMS early, because nobody wants to fail. However, understand when we do it (yes, I'm including myself), we make The Company's plan to give us inferior training work. The only way to prove their training plan is inadequate is to follow their plan to the T and fail. Who wants to be the one to prove that point?

That said, when I was a Flex Instructor, I never checked to see if someone had done their LMS. If they weren't prepared for the day's lesson, it manifested itself in other ways. I'm not sure why anyone should be concerned about how much LMS you've done.






.

Agree with your points, but I think the place to fix those issues is with the Training Committee, LOAs, and section 6 work.

Once I commit downrange to upgrade, my goals are A) learn all I can about my new craft and B) avoid any extra stress by getting through all my events smoothly. Another issue is setting the tone and example for your FO, who may be a new hire. I pretty much expect that to mean there will be some times you may be carrying said partner if they (like me) come from a background with zero heavy or airline experience. My 76 partner was an unflappably calm, very capable experienced FO who was already in theater, so it was relatively easy for us to get the job done. Some of our new captains will be hearing things like "what is a flow?" and "why can't we just use the checklist?" :D I can only imagine what a LIMFAC I would have been had I got VFR direct to the right seat of the MD-11 from fighter.

Where I thought the training REALLY could have been improved was not having 0400 box times. That--and some shortfalls with Hack's--I put in my critiques. I CC'd the ALPA guys on some of those as well. I didn't appreciate doing LMS on my own time, but I detested waking up at 2 for a 4 am box. Most guys gaffed off doing any briefing and did it the afternoon prior. It worked--because the IP cadre really did care--but it was far from optimum for anyone involved. It wasn't a instructor problem, but just a resource problem...we just didn't have enough training facilities for the volume of students. Good news it appears the trend is improving with more sims coming online.

Some of the issues we have with training are mirrored at other legacies. It might be worth some work at the National level to design what we believe is an acceptable baseline of academics verses self-study. I have a friend at Delta who has done multiple upgrades at both FDX and Delta (long story) and he describes how much more detailed the FDX training was. To be honest, that didn't make me feel so good about being a Diamond flyer on Delta, because I thought our 767 program was a bit light...at least compared to my previous MD-11 experience. In any case, we are at a point I think some of the responsibility to learn is definitely on our shoulders. While the amount of time we "owe" the company of our own time to prepare is certainly up for debate, under the current system you better plan on diving in and getting some of it done on your own. There comes a point where professional pride and self preservation become more important than figuring out who gets billed for the timesheet. I agree with your premise, but figure once academics start you need to just do all you can to get good at your craft. Take good notes and then try to fix any issues once you are back out on the line...

I think we're in the same hymnal if not on the same page. In short, my point is that as long as we are driven by our self-preservation instincts, they will never be convinced there are issues, and all the notes we take won't convince them to fix anything. They want training graduates, and we do whatever it takes to graduate. Problem? What problem?




And life goes on ...






.

Prior to FedEx training I'd done the General Aviation thing, Military & another airline. I thought I was an average pilot and I thought I was a good student pilot. I made a point of showing up on time and prepared. I thought I had a slightly better systems knowledge that the "average Joe."

During my first 18 months at FedEx, I bet I approached Management, Flight Training & ALPA three or 4 times with, "We had a better way of doing this at XYZ." I was shocked to see how uninterested everybody was. They really didn't care!

In my nieve mind, I had a better, sometime more efficient (cheaper!) way to achieve the same task. Why wouldn't they entertain hearing my suggestions? I finally concluded that, "we make so much money, why would we want to change anything?" In recent years it seems like cost savings have become a bigger priority (than anything!*?).

They might be more receptive today although like TonyC says, until our training failure rate starts costing them money I still don't think anyone will care. They'll keep trying to rely on our "pilot pride" to suck up any shortcomings in their program. They might even get a "bonus" for saving money. That's a bad approach to Flight Training in my opinion.

On a different but related issue, at one point (15 years ago?) we might have had the worst safety record in the industry? It was so bad that some of the Industry Safety Experts referred to FedEx pilots as cockroaches. "They come out at night and can't kill them! I had Navy, Air Force & ALPA Accident Investigation training. I approached Management and asked why we didn't have ALPA recommended industry practice safety programs. Once again they weren't the slightest bit interested? I was disappointed but not surprised.

At some point something changed with regard to our Safety policy. Maybe it was the insurance company demanding that we do something? Maybe it was that outside organization that came in and did a safety audit (it was the only time that I ever participated in a safety survey and never saw the recommendations!!!). NASA did a sleep study using FedEx pilots. FedEx went to court to prevent us from seeing those results (we finally got a copy via a FOIA request).

I'm still out on LTD but it looks to me like Management recently hired from a long time successful domestic airline. Maybe the long time FedEx management vs. the FedEx pilot ALWAYS being on opposite sides of nearly every discussion will come to an end?

It seems to me (maybe I'm a bit slower than the average guy?) that we should be on the same side on most issues. Both sides want to move airplanes from Point A to Point B in a safe and efficient manner. Why can't we just get along?

MM

:eek:

[QUOTE Both sides want to move airplanes from Point A to Point B in a safe and efficient manner. Why can't we just get along?

MM

:eek:[/QUOTE]

Because safety, efficiency, and fatigue are at odds. What is efficient to me, One leg to a long layover and extended training with systems classes and sims taught by non-pros is not efficient for GOC/management. Until we are a non-profit we'll be managing the balance and tugging from opposite sides.