Notices

Fedex Hiring Part II

Old 05-01-2018, 02:45 PM
  #131  
Gets Weekends Off
 
kronan's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: 757 Capt
Posts: 2,418
Default

If I know I'm not working the last week of the bid month (23-27 April for Example) and Do intend to work the 1st week of the next bid Month (30 April-4 May) it's fairly easy to schedule a JS for 30 April.
In general, under the Old VTO system, I've had great success with having CRS schedule my Random Reserve days inline with the periods of time I've intended to work. And that was true even as VTO 33 out of 35.

Under the new system, get the impression that there is Less Flexibility for CRS to build a VTO line since they are building VTO reserve with Lego Blocks of hard Plastic R days versus the malleable silly putty they used to use
kronan is offline  
Old 05-01-2018, 06:44 PM
  #132  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,099
Default

Originally Posted by Adlerdriver View Post
I don’t know. Can they? What do you suggest?
Are we still talking about jumpseating into a long-haul trip or has this morphed into something else? I mean, that’s how I ended up posting what I did.
When PurpleToolBox uses the term “commuting into” a trip, I believe he is referring to setting up a commute to have a relatively short time from commute complete to report time. Based on our schedule, the most effective way to do that is jumpseat on our own aircraft. So, that’s what I’m picturing when we have this discussion of setting up a protected commute. That’s why we have the protection and why the airline guys do. So we all can hopefully spend minimum time commuting, arrive within a few hours or less of the report time and do so with some redundancy. Therefore, part of the problem lies in the fact that the departure time of our morning flights doesn’t match up very well with any flights other than our own. With a few outlying exceptions, the only flights that would truly allow us to commute into most of our long-haul flights like the pax guys do are FX flights. If this has become about a pilot being protected when they jumpseat offline and come in 12 hours prior so they can go to their crashpad or a hotel and sleep, then that’s a different discussion, in my opinion

I’m not assuming a commute has to be on a FedEx flight. I rarely use a FedEx flight to commute to MEM for a 777 trip. I commute offline because I want to get to MEM and have a chance to sleep before my trip. It has nothing to do with concerns about being pulled off my trip if I jumpseat on our flight. So, even if we had a commuter policy that protected me while doing that, I still wouldn’t do it. But, I get the desire for something better than what we have. I just don’t think trying to use a passenger airline commuter policy as a model is valid or realistic if we are putting the policy into practice to allow us to commute into a long-haul flight.

One reason for that is there are some pretty significant differences between a typical major airline commute and ours to MEM. By definition, a major airline pilot domicile is typically a large hub with numerous inbound flight from every city they serve. Most commuters have direct flights for their commute. Contrast that with MEM. An outstation for all the major airlines with limited daily flights and requiring a connection for everyone except those few who live in one of the major airline hubs.

About those back-up flights. When someone has to explain their commute plan after they missed a trip, the back-up has to actually be available to the commuter. A 19:00 UAL primary commuter flight can’t use a 19:05 AA flight that leaves from the other side of O’hare as a back-up. So, the time getting from the pax terminal to the “dark side” of the FedEx ramp has to factored in to someone’s commute if it’s going to pass when they have to explain their situation.

I’m also coming at this discussion with the attitude that commuting into a 03:30 MEM-NRT flight is a completely different situation than commuting to a 15:30 pax flight to NRT. We all know the challenges of working at that time of day. Being rested for that departure is difficult even for someone who doesn’t commute. The logistics of even the best commute situation including a back-up to make that departure result in beginning one’s commute a minimum of 8-9 hours prior to departure. That’s showtime at the airport for a direct pax flight – not getting on and having enough time to get over to the FedEx ramp for the back-up. That’s best case (other than having access to two FX flights as primary and back-up). So, if FedEx offered us a typical airline commuter clause of any primary and any back-up, that means that almost all our pilots trying to comply while commuting to that NRT flight would be on duty at least 22-23 hours by the time they got on final at NRT. I know commuting isn’t duty but let’s be realistic about this. It’s not sleep either. I don’t care if you manage to nod off on the jumpseat or maybe catch a nap in a sleep room before show time. Those are great if they happen, but they’re not guaranteed events. Neither is sleeping on the bunk during the flight. I’ve had plenty of great sleep opportunities ruined by turbulence.

So, my point is that by putting that commute policy into practice, FedEx is basically giving tacit approval for that 22 to 23-hour duty day. They have no deniability because that’s the best-case scenario for almost everyone who would attempt to commute into that trip.

Contrast that with Airline “X” using the same policy: They treat the process like a black box and don’t want to know how you make the sausage – just that you’re in domicile when you’re supposed to be. There are so many variables to each pilot’s situation and the inbound flight schedules that it’s impossible to specifically determine what each one is doing. So, they have the ability to claim ignorance that FedEx would not.
I'm not really sure why you keep making assumptive arguments as to why we can't have a commuter policy for all flights. What I'm saying is that instead of coming up with possible scenarios as to why it wont work here, lets come up with ideas that can work here.

Like I said, company codifying what they feel is best practice to commute into contractual language would be better than what we have now, which is nothing. Even if it means being in base 12 hours before show time. If that helps a pilot make a less stressful commute, its a win win.

Now, can we stop looking for reasons why we can't and instead look at ways we can? I'm not experienced enough in commuting into international flights to make a suggestion on that nor am I creative enough. But I do feel its unfair not to have a protected commuter language that's the same for domestic flights.
FXLAX is offline  
Old 05-01-2018, 07:00 PM
  #133  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2016
Posts: 936
Default

Originally Posted by FXLAX View Post
I'm not really sure why you keep making assumptive arguments as to why we can't have a commuter policy for all flights. What I'm saying is that instead of coming up with possible scenarios as to why it wont work here, lets come up with ideas that can work here.

Like I said, company codifying what they feel is best practice to commute into contractual language would be better than what we have now, which is nothing. Even if it means being in base 12 hours before show time. If that helps a pilot make a less stressful commute, its a win win.

Now, can we stop looking for reasons why we can't and instead look at ways we can? I'm not experienced enough in commuting into international flights to make a suggestion on that nor am I creative enough. But I do feel its unfair not to have a protected commuter language that's the same for domestic flights.
So in essence you want to punish the domestic commuters who can commute in and operate out because reserve guys can’t? The company has a policy, it is in the contract, get to your base in time to check in for your trip or meet the 1 hour call out. If you don’t you lose the hours. If your commute plan sucked you lose the hours and get a nasty letter in your file. Do you really want to require the guy who drives in from Nashville to get there 8 hours prior?

The “Protected” provision isn’t screwing anyone, it does help a large percent of commuters. A 12 hour deviation type check in for a non deviation trip would not make anyone’s commute less stressful, just the opposite.
Fdxlag2 is offline  
Old 05-02-2018, 12:42 AM
  #134  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Adlerdriver's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 767 Captain
Posts: 3,987
Default

Originally Posted by FXLAX View Post
I'm not really sure why you keep making assumptive arguments as to why we can't have a commuter policy for all flights. What I'm saying is that instead of coming up with possible scenarios as to why it wont work here, lets come up with ideas that can work here.
For one, I'm being realistic. I'm also attempting to address some of the comments made using the assumption that whatever reality some pax airline's commuter policy is based on automatically applies here.

Originally Posted by FXLAX View Post
Like I said, company codifying what they feel is best practice to commute into contractual language would be better than what we have now, which is nothing. Even if it means being in base 12 hours before show time. If that helps a pilot make a less stressful commute, its a win win.
Let's keep in mind that "what we have now" applies to a very large percentage of the trips our pilots fly. I'm not sure why you refer to it as "nothing". Almost anyone commuting to a trip flown in the lower 48 can do so protected by our current policy. So, I guess what we're talking about is trying to protect a commute to the international stuff, ANC or HNL and maybe a few random cats and dogs.

So, what do you suggest? Give us some scenarios and a corresponding commuter policy you think will apply.

Originally Posted by FXLAX View Post
Now, can we stop looking for reasons why we can't and instead look at ways we can? I'm not experienced enough in commuting into international flights to make a suggestion on that nor am I creative enough. But I do feel its unfair not to have a protected commuter language that's the same for domestic flights.
Ok. Well I am experienced doing it. That's why I took the time to offer you specifics on the obstacles we face in commuting to international. If you lack the experience and knowledge to craft a policy, why are you continually suggesting a solution can be found? Isn't it possible that there is no policy allowing a commute directly into a long-haul flight that FedEx management would agree to because of the issues I brought up?

Unfair? Well, welcome to reality. That's life, as they say. International commute policy language that's the same for domestic flights isn't going to happen and I already explained why.

Maybe there's a solution involving a specific long haul policy. But trying to make a policy that can apply to both situations doesn't seem like a realistic goal.
Adlerdriver is offline  
Old 05-02-2018, 08:19 AM
  #135  
On Reserve
 
Joined APC: Apr 2018
Posts: 12
Default Anyone commute from the Philippines to HKG?

Cost of living is substantially lower in the Philippines Vs China. Just curious how easy that commute would be.
djslappy is offline  
Old 05-02-2018, 08:32 AM
  #136  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Albief15's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 2,889
Default

Originally Posted by djslappy View Post
Cost of living is substantially lower in the Philippines Vs China. Just curious how easy that commute would be.
We have several pilots that live in the PI and work out of Hong Kong. You forfeit housing allowance and education allowance if you don't live in HK, and the tax equalization. You are responsible for all foreign taxes, but also preserve your foreign tax exemption. Some of our pilots have chosen to live in Taiwan or Thailand and have made it work for them. I won't comment on whether its a net plus or minus for them financially as I don't know, but they all seem to enjoy living where they want and they make it work for their families.
Albief15 is offline  
Old 05-02-2018, 11:09 AM
  #137  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,099
Default Fedex Hiring Part II

Originally Posted by Fdxlag2 View Post
So in essence you want to punish the domestic commuters who can commute in and operate out because reserve guys can’t? The company has a policy, it is in the contract, get to your base in time to check in for your trip or meet the 1 hour call out. If you don’t you lose the hours. If your commute plan sucked you lose the hours and get a nasty letter in your file. Do you really want to require the guy who drives in from Nashville to get there 8 hours prior?

The “Protected” provision isn’t screwing anyone, it does help a large percent of commuters. A 12 hour deviation type check in for a non deviation trip would not make anyone’s commute less stressful, just the opposite.

I wasn’t meaning to say it should change to 12 hours. I was trying to say that having that additional protection exclusively for international commuters would help those who chose to use that provision. And I only mentioned that because someone else suggested it.

Last edited by FXLAX; 05-02-2018 at 11:26 AM.
FXLAX is offline  
Old 05-02-2018, 11:25 AM
  #138  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,099
Default

Originally Posted by Adlerdriver View Post
For one, I'm being realistic. I'm also attempting to address some of the comments made using the assumption that whatever reality some pax airline's commuter policy is based on automatically applies here.

Let's keep in mind that "what we have now" applies to a very large percentage of the trips our pilots fly. I'm not sure why you refer to it as "nothing". Almost anyone commuting to a trip flown in the lower 48 can do so protected by our current policy. So, I guess what we're talking about is trying to protect a commute to the international stuff, ANC or HNL and maybe a few random cats and dogs.

So, what do you suggest? Give us some scenarios and a corresponding commuter policy you think will apply.

Ok. Well I am experienced doing it. That's why I took the time to offer you specifics on the obstacles we face in commuting to international. If you lack the experience and knowledge to craft a policy, why are you continually suggesting a solution can be found? Isn't it possible that there is no policy allowing a commute directly into a long-haul flight that FedEx management would agree to because of the issues I brought up?

Unfair? Well, welcome to reality. That's life, as they say. International commute policy language that's the same for domestic flights isn't going to happen and I already explained why.

Maybe there's a solution involving a specific long haul policy. But trying to make a policy that can apply to both situations doesn't seem like a realistic goal.

I’m speaking of people actually trying to come up with something that works here rather than keep mentioning why nothing can ever be done. I’m not making assumptions of being forced to only use a Fedex Jumpseat or assumptions of trips we have now or trips we don’t even know about in the future. And I’m not making any assumptions as to only protect international trips but also reserve and not making the assumption that they all have to be the same. Im also not assuming that what we have now for domestic trips has to change because of added protection for reserve and international. I’m looking for those more experienced than I and more creative than I to suggest something. If there are no ideas here from you or anyone else, I would only make this assumption, that this is not a broad enough pool to find creative solutions because this is a man made “problem” and any man made problem can be addressed. I mean, even codifying what the company feels would be a best practice commute would be better than what we have now, meaning nothing for reserve and international. I apologize I didn’t make that clearer previously. I’m here talking to pilots about our collectively bargained contract in order to come up with ideas to make it better, which also includes making it fairer or more equitable, if you will. It’s germane to the discussion. Of course, I also accept that life isn’t fair because collectively we may feel we don’t need to improve certain sections of our contract that only benefits a certain demographic (commuters) even though that demographic is further segmented (domestic, international, reserve) into haves and have nots.

Now with that said, instead of repeating why it cant be done, can we talk about what can be done?
FXLAX is offline  
Old 05-02-2018, 11:27 AM
  #139  
Gets Weekends Off
 
The Walrus's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2010
Position: Socket Drawer
Posts: 1,797
Default

All you have to do is get rid of the 13:30 restriction.
The Walrus is offline  
Old 05-02-2018, 11:41 AM
  #140  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2016
Posts: 936
Default

Originally Posted by FXLAX View Post
I wasn’t meaning to say it should change to 12 hours. I was trying to say that having that additional protection exclusively for international commuters would help those who chose to use that provision. And I only mentioned that because someone else suggested it.
I think I would rather risk losing the hours on a trip instead of changing it to require me to show up in Memphis at some specified time or manner other than show time.
Fdxlag2 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
gzsg
Delta
30
10-28-2015 08:42 AM
TonyC
Major
0
01-24-2006 05:21 PM
Sasquatch
Cargo
3
11-30-2005 07:42 PM
Freight Dog
Hiring News
4
09-17-2005 12:46 PM
Freighter Captain
Cargo
3
05-16-2005 06:00 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices