BoilerUP

There is no factory freighter program for the 320 series, CEO or NEO, just like there isn't one for the 330-300 or any 330NEO.

That said, EFW worked closely with Airbus for all P2F programs so I'm sure it could be integrated somehow, for the right price...though I think Airbus has pretty significant lead times on the 320NEO family.

The 321NEO is the same fuselage as a CEO and doesn't really have any more payload despite a higher MTOW, so I'm not sure any additional performance or fuel burn benefits would be worth the additional capital cost.

PW305

I don’t think the 321NEO production line could support that demand... there is already a backlog of almost 3,000 airframes for just that type. There are a lot of 330’s leaving pax service in the near future though. They are certainly viable conversion candidates.

FXLAX

I was saying to you that the question should be if it’s in the pilots’ interest, not if it’s management’s economical interest. So I’m not sure what you mean by starting my analysis. My stance, if it wasn’t already obvious, is that it’s not about what is economical for the company. Because I’m pretty confident that it would be more economical for them to farm a lot more flying.

Minimums

I see. I was also thinking the neo with the prats/sharklets has considerable more range than the older 321s, which might be a better replacement on the routes the 757 does today. Like it’s been mentioned though, it will be a long time before any are available for this.

OKLATEX

First, if you have an concerns with Scope, I also encourage you to contact your Block Rep and Scope Committee Chairman. I actually would like a Scope Compliance report from ALPA. Seems the only time it is really brought up is during Peak. I also think that the 737 flying associated with the TNT merger should be closely monitored. Scope Compliance is something the newly elected Block 5 Rep talked about in his campaign letters. Hopefully he’ll live up to that.

Regarding the Alaska flying, I’ll be honest, while I would love to see that flying, as mentioned, I just don’t think it is practical to expect us to fly given the assumed economical considerations. As far as I know, CargoJet is still flying our cargo out to Bermuda from Newark, along with cargo for DHL and UPS. Same goes for the Lihue ‘flower charter’ by Aloha. I had a friend who flew that trip on the -11, I never had a chance to do it. Would have loved to. Frankly, I wonder if we even have the contract, perhaps UPS picked up. Perhaps if we had an airplane between the ATR and 757, maybe we would pick up some of this flying. Always been amazed at that gap in capacity since the 727-100s left, believe they were parked in 2006.

I’m well aware of the results of weak Scope. I flew for a wholly owned and watched them replace DC-9s/737-200s and MD-80s with EMB-145s. I loved doing the flying, but that flying was mainline and would have rather have seen it stay there. Frankly, only reason I’m here is because of 9/11 and the proliferation of the 50 Seat Regional Jet and the ensuing Bankruptcies.

That all being said, FDX has tended to prefer keep flying within as much as possible. That’s our business model and they like to control. It is part of the service they sell and market. Perhaps before Fred leaves, we should take another look to assure we are adequately protected. During the last contract, the Scope Section wasn’t even opened; the explanation was it protected what we had. We have desires to make it stronger, the company has desires that probably wouldn’t like. Safer bet to keep it closed. Scope was improved during the interim Contract prior to that which included with language for the FDAs.

I’m not saying that I can say our Scope is 100% solid, but in the past 15 years, it seems to have protected us well. Is it it worth discussing amongst ourselves and attempt to improve a glaring weakness during negotiations, absolutely. However, comparing us to the PAX airlines and fearing the same rules apply, I’m not sure that is a good reason to negotiate Scope. We should learn from the mistakes of AA/DAL/UAL for for sure. Management is management, same play book, but we do have a very different business model.

Domestically, I haven’t seen the company shuffle much flying to the Feeders. Huntsville, Alabama is the only city I can think of that we lost to the Feeders. Was a 727, went to an ATR. We however we gained Chattanooga. During the Recession, we actually took flying back from Tradewinds which was contracted out, believe that was Puerto Rico flying. AFW may have lost some flying, but I’m not 100% sure on that. Don’t think. Perhaps a route or two, but as far as I know, we didn’t lose any other cities. We used to serve Washington-National but that was consolidated back to Dulles.

We did lose the ‘South Cone’ in South America. Once was flown by the 727 and MD-11. I’ve heard LANChile is flying it. Again, I would love to see that flying back, heard it is supposed to come back. However, I do prefer to see FedEx Management make wise strategic decisions. Traditionally we don’t see huge growth, nor do we see huge periods contraction. I appreciate the stability that FedEx has offered in that regard.

Again, I’m not saying that our Scope is Rock Solid, but from my observation, I’m not sure it is as weak as some feel. Certainly do think concerns are worth mentioning to the Reps, especially as we come up on Negotiations.

FXLAX

Just a couple notes. Until this thread, this is the first time I hear of FedEx freight (other than feeder) being flown in Alaska, Hawaii, Bermuda, and other South American countries. All I knew of is the Canada flying and the TNT 737s (we took their 777s, why not also their 737s?). How much other FedEx freight is done by other than FedEx pilots?

Just because “scope is opened” during negotiations, doesn’t mean anything will change. In reality, all sections are open during section 6 negotiations. If nothing changed in the last cycle, it simply means both parties agreed to current language. That doesn’t mean one side or the other didn’t breach the topic during negotiations.

Also, you mentioned the business model a couple of times. Any airlines’ business model is one new CEO or management team away from changing. Not to mention that with low yield e-commerce set to explode, or who knows what else that could change the landscape, (brexit, other trade wars, tariffs, single pilot ops, terrorism, war, etc) could change management’s view of the business model. That’s what happened with passenger airlines post 911 (RJ expansion) and post recession bankruptcies (consolidation). Have we learned from passenger carriers? What has changed since then that were lessons learned from what they went through?

OKLATEX

Look, I don’t think I disagree with your thoughts in the big scheme of things, or at least in asking the question of, “Is our Scope good enough?”

As mentioned before, I hope you are reaching out to the Reps and Scope Committee Members.

As far is who else is flying our stuff. I have no idea, a question for the Scope Committee. I wish we as a pilot group were more enlightened on such things. Why we didn’t get the 737 Flying? I believe part of that was to assure EU approval.

Regarding the Scope Section not being opened during the last contract, that’s the reasoning from I remember. That, and the fewer sections, ideally the faster the contract gets done. I’ve heard that reasoning somewhere through my career. I believe it was during one of our contracts. I believe both reasons came from the last contract.

As far as our business model. I agree, any company is one CEO away from Bankruptcy. That being said, I have a lot of faith in FedEx Corporate Management to strategically steer the company. They have said they have a plan, and for us at Express, that is focusing on the core business and moving away from low yield volume (Amazon). I’m not sure our true growth will be in the e-commerce world directly. Growth, I believe is going to be International, and to your point, Scope likely should be revisited during the next contract.

I think we should look at what where our peers made their mistakes for sure and learn from their mistakes. I witnessed the RJ phenomenon. It’s origins started well before 9/11 and the Recession. While I think there are lessons to be learned, I think FedEx guys learned lessons the hard way in their dealing with Fred, both Domestically and with the Subic Bay Domicile. What you see is our current Scope adapted from the Flight Crew Handbook to Contractual language. The language seems to have served us well. (Yes, I agree, if there are weaknesses, they should be addressed).

Frankly, I think a strong similarity does exist between us and our passenger peers. Most of them are today are worried about their International flying being done by Joint Ventures. Like I said before, I agree with you, Scope should probably be looked at again, especially with the a majority of our growth being International.

SaltyDog

Just a jump in place for FedEx friends as an outsider but one interested.
I see the ASL 737s in Europe painted in FedEx colors. In future, could it be 767s or 777s? All under the cloak of cabotage or not?
Section 1.B.4 seems interesting regarding international scope on quick read, does not appear to only be a cabotage issue. Is it a TNT side letter?
Once Fred is gone, could or would next CEO implement 1.B.4 in a much larger scale? Its business. Fred is unique and unique ego as the designer entrepreneur. But like Herb at WN, the spirit of the entrepreneur changes after they are gone and the company is more focused on costs than pride and ego of the entrepreneur.
Routes can be cleverly designed to include minimal cabotage specifically to allow company to use the cabotage prohibitions even if just a few cabotage parcels onboard. Say 80 pounds in a 45K load. Its a bear to get the details of how it can be designed to remove seniority company pilots from company flying. Personally, always thought Fred liked his pilot team doing the flying regardless of contract until I saw the Fedex painted 737s in Europe.

BoilerUP

It may be mentioned upthread, but doesn't Morningstar also operate 757s in FedEx livery?

UnusualAttitude

All things we need to spend time and effort investigating and codifying the contractual language to ensure our long term security.

The 737’s are operating on just a few routes that we simply don’t have 5th freedom rights to operate on. Similar to the 757’s that operate on two intra-Canada routes.

I would mention that one thing that makes our flagship express product so valuable is the company’s complete operational control of our flights. It is not uncommon at all to see revisions and schedule changes in order to protect freight. This wouldn’t be the case if we began to outsource flying on some large scale.

To my first point though, 99.99% of our pilot group, myself included, are highly motivated and we believe in the service that OUR company is providing to our customers. I am hopeful that the company and the union can codify this partnership in Sect 1 in the next CBA.