Notices

Fedex Hiring Part II

Old 04-29-2018, 05:12 PM
  #91  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,099
Default Fedex Hiring Part II

Originally Posted by busdriver12 View Post
Hmm, that language doesn't make any sense. Why would it be helpful to the company in any way if there was a flight available 24-36 hours prior to the jumpseat that you were going to take? By the time you get on your jumpseat, that flight's long gone. Sounds like the company didn't look at the contract language very closely.

There's a lot of best practice language that we need to get into the contract. Thought we were going to do it last time.

Sorry, I wasn’t very clear in explaining it. What it says is that you can only plan on a particular flight if that flight, 36 hours before departure, has a flight available for sale to the public or a Jumpseat available. Meaning, you can’t plan to use a flight that is sold out (no seats available for sale to the public). If that was the case, you would need to find another flight that meets that criteria in order to not be disciplined if you don’t make it when actually attempting to commute on it.
FXLAX is offline  
Old 04-29-2018, 07:43 PM
  #92  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,756
Default

Got it, makes more sense now.
busdriver12 is offline  
Old 04-30-2018, 01:41 AM
  #93  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Adlerdriver's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 767 Captain
Posts: 3,987
Default

PTB,

You continually assert that we have a restriction on commuting into long-haul flights that is both enforced by management and codified in our CBA. These are not factual statements. Any pilot here has the option to make that choice if they want. I don’t claim the intimate knowledge that you do regarding this “removal event” everyone has heard of. I heard it involved some military duty which when combined with the commute and pending international flight gave a management pilot who was made aware some pause for concern. Whatever the details, unless that pilot and this other senior jumpseater who were removed from their trips want to come on PFC and share their details firsthand, I think we’re all shooting in the dark. Even if you have the specifics accurate, what I do know is this event occurred during the tenure of JG as 777 Fleet captain (or whatever we called that position at the time). I’m pretty sure he was the person who made the decision to remove this pilot. Perhaps the non-probationary pilot just got caught in the frag pattern and was in the wrong place at the wrong time. It wouldn’t be the first time someone in a position of authority over-stepped their mandate. But, the bottom line is that this occurred years ago, JG is retired and I don’t think it’s valid to conclude that this one isolated event means we are all subject to the restrictions you claim.

The CBA language you quote to support your claim does not. It certainly doesn’t prohibit a pilot from scheduling a jumpseat that doesn’t comply with 26.J.2. The whole purpose of it is to give each pilot specifics on how to commute to work while receiving protection in the case of a failed commute. It’s not written to imply some kind of restriction applies to those pilots who either choose not to meet the criteria or can’t because of their commute situation. They just don’t get the benefit of the protection. The authors of that section were attempting to create a set of criteria that would allow as many of our pilots as possible to commute protected while satisfying the company’s desire to protect the operation. That’s it. As far as the 13:30 duty day restriction – that seems to match the operational (not scheduled) domestic duty restriction currently in our CBA. It also matches what most domestic hub-turn pilots are going to do the night following their commute anyway. They’re going to show an hour prior to a flight inbound to MEM, fly in, sit the sort and fly out to a layover. Why wouldn’t management agree to a commute plan/duty day that effectively matches what each pilot is limited to on any given night of hub-turning.

Your discussion of numbers of reserves vs trips may provide some rationale for a new, separate long-haul commuter policy we could negotiate but beyond that it really has nothing to do with reality. The simple fact is that given our flight schedule, very few of our long-haul commuters would be able to meet the requirements set out in the commuter policies of the major airlines. So, it makes no sense to say they we should be able to do what they do. Many of their long-haul pilots face the same limited options that many of our pilots have and as a result are not able to commute into their trips with commuter protection either.

There’s a very important distinction between the commuter policies at major airlines and the one in place at FedEx. Our policy was written to allow almost every pilot commuting to almost any domestic trip on our own aircraft to do that protected. Pax guys typically need a flight and one or two back-ups but that policy in no way guarantees them access to every trip in their domestic bid-pack. Our policy also allows pilots to commute to just about any domestic trip they can hold. Do you ever hear one of our domestic pilots talk about whether a trip is “commutable” or not? I haven’t. That can be a pretty significant distinction for pax pilots, both long and short haul types. Many pax commuters with seniority choose to avoid half their bidpack lines because they can’t get there the same day. Those who can’t avoid them have to commute in the day before. Same thing on the back end of trips that don’t give them a chance to get home that same day and would require an extra night in domicile.

Regarding your continuing claim that long-haul airline pilots enjoy a much more liberal approach to their commute, I have to wave the BS flag because you’re really talking apples and oranges. You’re cherry picking one commute scenario and making what I believe is a very broad and incorrect assumption that it applies to “95%” of pax long-haul pilots. To then extrapolate that assumption to every long-haul pilot at FedEx is equally incorrect. We don’t have access to the same flight schedules many of those pax pilots do. Our flights leave at completely different time blocks than their flights and the commuter flight options for a large number of our pilots are just not as numerous.

I don’t think you’ve bothered to actually consider various commute scenarios for all these “lucky” long-haul pax guys who can commute into their trips with protection. Maybe you’ve got some pals at other airlines who’ve found a niche that works great for them based on where they live and their seniority. But, not every long-haul pilot at those airlines have such picture-perfect commute. Certainly not 95%. I just deadheaded out of ORD on an AA flight to PVG that left at 10:30. My next one goes to NRT at 13:00. Can a Denver based AA pilot commute into those flights? Not the PVG flight. None of the AA or UAL flight gets him from DEN to ORD in time. So, he has no choice but to come in the night before. How about the later NRT flight? Probably – since he’s got one primary on his own metal and a UAL backup. What if he lives in SEA? Then he can’t get to either one. How about those AA pilots who choose to live in a smaller community like Norfolk, VA (very popular with quite a few FedEx pilots). Again, unable to make the PVG flight with a same day commute. The NRT flight? Maybe but he’s not on his own metal, using an offline A319 as his primary and an RJ for a backup that arrives with 4 minutes to spare prior to check-in time. Would that pass the sniff test for the Chief pilot if the pilot misses his trip? I can’t say for sure, but I kind of doubt it. I don’t think I would care to do that for every trip and I seriously doubt a Norfolk resident AA pilot would either.
Adlerdriver is offline  
Old 04-30-2018, 02:01 AM
  #94  
On Reserve
 
Joined APC: Apr 2018
Posts: 12
Default

Y’all should start a jumpseat thread!
djslappy is offline  
Old 04-30-2018, 02:38 AM
  #95  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Aug 2014
Posts: 46
Default

Originally Posted by djslappy View Post
Is CGN junior or senior and what equipment is based there. Would love to be there if given the opportunity!
CGN for f/o is staffed at 100 percent off of the last system bid.
That means there are no slots until someone comes up on their 5 year mark.


Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
Skippy320 is offline  
Old 04-30-2018, 05:05 AM
  #96  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Adlerdriver's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 767 Captain
Posts: 3,987
Default

Originally Posted by PurpleToolBox View Post
Another example of WTF??? The MD-11 pilots use a gym mat, thrown onto the floor, as a crew rest facility. That's not a joke. The pilots on the few MD11s without a sleeper bunk, on long haul flights, have a mattress similar to a gymnasium mat that is laid onto the dirty floor that they sleep on in the courier area of the airplane. How in the world was that ever deemed acceptable?
There is no FAR requirement for any kind of sleep/rest facility on an aircraft scheduled for over 8 and less than 12. JetBlue let their RFOs lay on the floor in the back of their A320s. Other major airlines just took a business class seat (long before the days of lay flat) or a row of three coach seats and offered them up as a way for the additional crew member to grab a nap. None of those options are a perfect solution but the bottom line is that the FARs require nothing so anything these companies do is gravy.
Adlerdriver is offline  
Old 04-30-2018, 05:24 AM
  #97  
New Hire
 
Joined APC: Dec 2016
Posts: 8
Default

Am I understanding this correctly??? On reserve you can drop reserve days and pick up trips? You can actually modify your schedule and go flying instead of sitting on reserve?
CapnRC is offline  
Old 04-30-2018, 05:31 AM
  #98  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Position: Two Wheeler FrontSeat
Posts: 1,162
Default

Originally Posted by CapnRC View Post
Am I understanding this correctly??? On reserve you can drop reserve days and pick up trips? You can actually modify your schedule and go flying instead of sitting on reserve?
Yes that’s true
StarClipper is offline  
Old 04-30-2018, 05:41 AM
  #99  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: FO
Posts: 3,031
Default

Originally Posted by Adlerdriver View Post
There is no FAR requirement for any kind of sleep/rest facility on an aircraft scheduled for over 8 and less than 12. JetBlue let their RFOs lay on the floor in the back of their A320s. Other major airlines just took a business class seat (long before the days of lay flat) or a row of three coach seats and offered them up as a way for the additional crew member to grab a nap. None of those options are a perfect solution but the bottom line is that the FARs require nothing so anything these companies do is gravy.
Not that it applies to us, but FAR 117 now requires certain types of rest areas for augmented crew in order to have lengthier duty periods.
BlueMoon is offline  
Old 04-30-2018, 06:14 AM
  #100  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Position: Fetal in the hub
Posts: 404
Default

Originally Posted by Adlerdriver View Post
There is no FAR requirement for any kind of sleep/rest facility on an aircraft scheduled for over 8 and less than 12. JetBlue let their RFOs lay on the floor in the back of their A320s. Other major airlines just took a business class seat (long before the days of lay flat) or a row of three coach seats and offered them up as a way for the additional crew member to grab a nap. None of those options are a perfect solution but the bottom line is that the FARs require nothing so anything these companies do is gravy.
Respectfully the FARs are minimum requirements. They are often not reflective of industry best practices or the highest standard of safety. (i wouldn't consider those gravy)

"Just because it is legal doesn't make it safe"

You're correct 'none of those options are a perfect solution", but they are all a far sight better than the "solution" we currently use. I think PTB and many others are approaching this from a best practices stand point and not this is what the regulator requires.

FEDEX does apply this to many areas where a value addition can be found. An example is the creation of the landing safety improvment team on for the MD-11 and the subsequently implemented PMR program.

I think this is an important point for those considering joining this company. If someone can make a case and it will improve performance, efficiency, or safety even if it involves spending money FEDEX will do it.
I haven't been here that long, but there are dozens of examples of this that I can cite without references. I have never once felt that this company doesn't care about this crew force to spend money if it makes sense.

What I have seen is a crew force often times unwilling to show the intestinal fortitude required to demand change, but that's another issue.
Shaman 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