Originally Posted by 3pointlanding (Post 3495842)

Did anyone see the CNBC article about the company cutting cost measures including the closing of 90 offices, hiring, and cutting flights among other things to go to the trash heap? Interesting article. They missed the earnings
target by a lot.

Originally Posted by Dakota (Post 3495898)

One had to know there would be some sort of economic fallout for entire countries shutting down their economies for 2 years. While I don't think FEDEX is doing this solely due the pilot group being in contract negotiations; there are some pretty smart people working @ Hacks Cross realizing this economic situation would eventually occur and they will use it against us (standby for concessions). A good reason for the Company to drag out negotiations. Just an average line pilot's opinion.

Originally Posted by 3pointlanding (Post 3495842)

Did anyone see the CNBC article about the company cutting cost measures including the closing of 90 offices, hiring, and cutting flights among other things to go to the trash heap? Interesting article. They missed the earnings
target by a lot.

Originally Posted by pinseeker (Post 3495915)

They missed the earnings target by $390 million. Though that may sound like a lot, it was only a 1.6% miss.

Originally Posted by NotMrNiceGuy (Post 3495948)

To add to this, the last time our contract was signed in 2016, Net Income was $3.02B. In fiscal 2022, Net Income was $5.50B. I wouldn’t say we’re in the poor house.

2016 FedEx Earnings
2022 FedEx Earnings

Originally Posted by Tuck (Post 3496272)

I think you mean 2015 signing?

Originally Posted by TonyC (Post 3495748)

I regret It's unfortunate that I may have challenged your attention span with many words. Are you planning to read the entire TA if and when it ever arrives, or will you simply rely on the vote of the MEC or some other substitute for reading the actual long document to "inform" your vote? It will undoubtedly be long and complex.




It's clear that you would not say that.

But you continue to describe them as passive observers, and you're content with that.






.

Originally Posted by TonyC (Post 3495765)

The MEC was informed about the outcome of the 1 Sep negotiations session (no TA) and the decision to add more meeting dates at the same time and by the same method as the membership, that is by reading the update published 2 days later. There were not 15 individual conversations between the reps and the MEC Chair or the NC Chair, nor was there a single conference call or meeting for them to be informed and choose the next steps. They read about it exactly the same way all of us read about it.



Even though you don't believe it is so, it seems we both agree it would be bad.






.

Originally Posted by FXLAX (Post 3496409)

Let me rephrase it then, I don’t believe someone posting on APC that it happened the way you described it.

Originally Posted by pinseeker (Post 3496446)

Well, since you like to tell others to call their rep, so why don't you call yours? Ask them if they were briefed after the last negotiation session on Sept 1 before the message came out from the NC on Sept 3. Ask them if they were asked their opinion about adding more sessions and how many more should be added. Ask them if the MEC voted to allow more sessions to be added past Sept 1 and when that vote took place. Then you can tell us how it really happened.