TonyC

Because once upon a time the MD-11 crew rest facility was weight limited.


Now it's just a gotcha to make sure you enter the data AFTER your physical examination, and not BEFORE.






.

Fdxlag2

That is supposedly a function of when one our more infamous pilots facked her class one.

DLax85

I'm well aware of the specific event on why we must enter the date, but it's a very serious question on why we were ever asked our weight

I'm sure it could easily fluctuate over the 6 months the data is updated.

Why is that question asked?

What if you don't enter a weight?

What if you enter 1 or 999?

Im not a black helicopter type of guy, but I believe very few of us grow vertically during our Fedex careers. Most of us grow horizontally.

I honestly believe the data on age, height and weight would be very informative to any type of medical/insurance actuary.

When the sample size is large, summary data becomes very useful and predictive.

MaydayMark

I'm sure this was the reason several years ago. I wonder what happens if you leave it blank (or just make up a weight)?

Fdxlag2

They could just as easily ask you to submit a copy of the ticket. I think we used to have to do that. I think the weight is just a quality control, but who knows.

TonyC

All it is now is an opportunity to lie and get fired.


And apparently a reason to hijack a thread about abandoning our Defined Benefit retirement plan.






.

DLax85

Pilot Gross Weight/Health ~ Pilot Mortality

Unfortunately, they are related!

Especially when talking about a retirement benefit that ends/or is reduced upon a pilot's death.

...but yes, I digressed.

Awaiting more insights from those who were able to attend the two hub turn meetings.

Anyone ask them why they weren't also exploring increased B funds with cash over cap clause?

(...something that does NOT die when you die)

Adlerdriver

Back to that. I just watched the latest video. Perhaps I'm particularly sensitive to the prior sell job of CBA 2015. But, for those who were involved in the creation of this video, I have a couple of points.

First, the little "see-saw" diagrams that start at 10:10 are a joke. The DB plan picture with the big risk balls all weighted on the company side. Poor FedEx, look at how bad our current A-plan is for them. Of course, then comes the equally dire looking DC plan slide with all the balls on our side. Yikes!! We don't want that either!! What are we going to do?
Finally, the happy Variable plan slide. Little balls (must mean small risk), see-saw balanced (I'm surprised there wasn't some calming music playing), risk shared. Whew!! I know what I want now. That's the plan for me.

Back on see-saw slide #1, the narration discussed vague consequences resulting from contribution requirement increases. These include:
Wage freezes
Reductions to other benefits
Plan Freezes
Really????? Some of us have actually experienced these things first hand, but it took bankruptcy filings and force majeure clauses to make them happen. Absent those huge factors allowing such changes, are we really worried about horse trading benefits to save our pension, our wages or the plan itself being frozen without our consent? Under normal conditions, those only happen if we allow them during section 6 negotiations. I realize FedEx corporate health isn't guaranteed, but for now and at least into the reasonable future I'd say it's looking pretty good. We've always known the A-plan was subject to these risks. The hybrid balance between A and B plans as well as our company's success helped us sleep at night. Somehow that's been ok until now. So, call a spade a spade. We simply want more money and based on the company's line in the sand, you've decided this is the only way to do it. So, if you want us to listen, leave the highly unlikely doomsday scenarios out of the discussion and just give us the facts.

One other minor point: The fact that a variable pension plan was part of the Flying Tiger retirement program, "for a time" isn't relevant to our current situation especially without any context. Was that "time" one negotiating cycle in the 1950s, 60s, 70s? Why didn't it stay as part of their retirement plan? Is this little tidbit of nostalgia supposed to calm our former Tiger skeptics in some way? I said just the facts, so now more specifically, just the relevant facts or you're going to lose us quickly.

Raptor

No black helicopters about the weight question when entering the medical. It was there before the false input person too.

The MD-11 Crew Rest Module bunk is limited to 289 pounds. In a few of the planes there are placards with this on it. The company will remove a pilot who enters over 289 when on flights over 12 hours which requires 4 crew members and a class 1 sleep facility. The MD-11 no longer has any over 12 hour routes (used to have some continental USA / Japan routes which were over 12).

For flights under 12 hours, a class 1 sleep facility isn't required, and the RFO seat on the flight deck or the reclining seats in the courier area are suitable rest facilities and don't have that weight limitation.

Does the 777 bunk have a similar restriction?

FXDX

The question was asked if the new VB plan could guarantee a minimum of $130K in benefits per year. The former RI chair bent over backward to say how it was nearly, almost, positively, pretty darn sure that it would never be less. You could tell he really wanted to say yes but couldn't. Lost a few people right then I suspect.