The flying is being reduced and the base is being closed because most of our pilots trusted Fred instead of pursuing scope. Biting us in the ass now, just like the express employees who trusted Fred instead of unionizing.

Once again you are talking out your ass. We improved scope in two other contracts. That right you were not here. Improved it twice as many times as retirement has been improved.

d

What part of CGN closing don't you understand. Hardly defeatist that people think we are going to get some magic scope clause the prevents the company from closing bases. We'll spend captial trying to get scope clause that won't prevent the company from doing what they want internationally.

we all liked you better when you were moping about the failed TA. now you’re just that angry old dude railing against the movement. your voice has been heard. we know you don’t like the majority decision. maybe sit this one out. this fight ain’t for you.

Why don’t you just say the quiet part out loud? You are secure in your seat even if the airline shrinks while outsourced flying grows and you don’t care about anything other than Sec 28. That can be your opinion and at least it wouldn’t be veiled in obvious mistruths. Claiming that nothing can be done about this outsourced flying or securing flying for MSL flying is simply not true.

Fdx management is trying to make this place like an Uber or an airbnb of freight. They will use their technology and hubs to sell a service and use as few FDX employees as possible and as many contractors as they can, from airplanes to last mile delivery. This is the new business model. Our scope has always been weak. I am not sure why people havent seen this coming for the last ten years and for the life of me I dont know how they got so many CovidNew hires when all the others have been hiring gangbuster for 6 years or so.

When you get deliveries at your house when is last time an XPRESS employee delivered it? For me its when my USAA debit card gets compromised and they send me a new one and thats about it. This is the new way and not sure how much we can really do to stop it.

Sure.........

I know you can find this info out for yourself on VIPS, but i'll save you the time. These cities were flown by the CGN bidpack, but as of April '24, ALL FLOWN BY ASL. CGN will be down to 4 cities, AMS, BCN, BSL, and HAJ. Let all of us know when you see any of that flying in the MEM57 bidpack.

ARN
BER
BUD
CPH
EMA (LGG and CDG)
HEL
MAD
MAN
MUC
MXP (from LGG)
OPO
TLV (who knows)
VIE

“ASL isn’t growing…”

NC committee member during a roadshow presentation last summer. Unconscionable.

Truth hurts but the company makes business decisions to make money, not employ you.

And I pay ALPA to protect my job and keep my seat at the table.

*Thanks for making it crystal clear which side you’re on. Not unnoticed that you didn’t refute my comments when it comes to your own perspective. Sorry, you’re in the minority now. The loud minority. For the record many of us love this company and want nothing more than to see it succeed and maintain its place in the worldwide business community. We also want to make sure that we are a part of the future success.

Sounds like a straight up lie to me. Does the NC just believe whatever the company tells them and then regurgitate it to the membership.

"SAFE AND EFFECTIVE"

If you add Stan to your ignore list (like I have for half of the people on JF) this place gets a lot more reasonable...

Exactly. Getting absolutely played.

From the SIG notes:

Looking ahead, the seven European cities remaining with 757 service will be reduced by three in April. We are projected to lose EMA, MAD, and MUC. If you have not had the opportunity to serve our customers in these cities, this may be your last chance.

This validates why I voted no. The Scope section alone was a deal killer for me, not to mention all the rest of it.

UPS doessn't fly to MUC either. Or EDI, or ATH, or Belfast, or Milan, etc. etc.. And FDX has 9 777's in NRT and another 8 in KIX. While UPS has 2. I wouldn't be complaining.

Of course you know that isn't the point. I suggest going to the FCIF Posting of 23-01. It can be found in the Postings link, in the Gen Info tab of the Resources drop down. Go down to the 4th bullet under domicile plans. Let us know what you find and if you see any of the lost flying in the MEM57 bidpack. THAT, is the point. Where has all of the flying gone compared to where they said it would go?

What does UPS having less airplanes in NRT and KIX have to do with us losing flying to a subcontractor in Europe because our scope is the joke of the industry? I don’t understand why we shouldn’t be complaining about losing flying?

Latest Scope email
 

Where are all the TA YES voters? Are you awake yet?!

The company is exploiting our extremely weak current scope section everyday, and you wanted to give the company MORE leverage to outsource our jobs?!

India triangle flying GONE come June and outsourced.Thats P1 freight!

How much more BS and lies from the company is it going to take for you to see this gutting of FedEx is REAL?

WAKE UP

So with the India flying, is the company just going to permanently pay the penalty?

Also, I thought trunk planes were being removed. If the trunk fleet is shrinking, how can they wet lease?

Putting on my best previous MEC impersonation: "ThE rLa IsN't EnFoRcEaBlE fOr ExTrAtErRiToRiAl FlYiNg!!!!"

The new Mec will tell you the exact same thing.

What penalty? Belly freight costs them NOTHING. Our international scope is HORRIBLE.

Think Scope hopefuls are the ones that need to wake up. Company will not give up the international flexibility. How do you think the new MEC and NC are going to get it changed? Hold their breath? Use all the leverage we have?

Guess you didn't do your due diligence when coming here. I know they promised and said this and that. If it isn't in the form of a legally enforceble document it doesn't mean squat.

When I got hired in 1998 they said we would have 5000 pilots. Only took 23 years for that to happen. But they said!!

Kind of like the Major pax carriers and thier code sharing?

Not to be advocating any action, but if we have in our contract scope clauses and the company says they don't have to follow that because it's out of the country. Wouldn't the same logic apply to work actions out of the country?? The RLA would not apply?? I know we don't have those clauses now, but if we did??

If we had tighter scope clauses it would make sense to me that the company would honor them so we would honor other areas in the contract. I don't think guys want too much. If it's purple freight we want to fly it. If purple freight is originating at a location that we do not serve and the total freight is less than 20K daily then ATRs are ok. Otherwise it should be on a MSL manned aircraft.

You are correct. Since the RLA only applies to the US, if the guys in Paris wanted to strike because it's Thursday and everybody in Paris is striking for a day. They are not covered by the RLA and could be fired with no recourse.

1.C.7 from the IPA 2020 Contract:

7.Resolution of Disputes Concerning International Operations
If any dispute arises as to the interpretation or application of Article 1 to international operations as defined in paragraph 4 above, the dispute shall be submitted to final and binding arbitration in accordance with Article 7 and Article 1.F. of this Agreement. The Company, its affiliates, the Association, and their successors agree, that in connection with any dispute before an arbitrator or in court, not to raise as a defense the non-applicability of the Railway Labor Act to international operations as defined in C. above or flights which originate or terminate in the United States. It is also agreed that the provisions of this paragraph are specifically enforceable. The duty to arbitrate as well as the judicial review of any arbitration award under this paragraph shall be specifically enforceable in either the Federal District Court for the Western District of Kentucky or the Jefferson County Circuit Court, Louisville, Kentucky. For these purposes the parties consent to jurisdiction and venue in these courts. The parties further agree that the choice of law in any such proceeding under this paragraph will be Sections 153 and 184 of the Railway Labor Act, 45 U.S.C. Sections 151 et seq. If the Jefferson Circuit Court refuses to exercise jurisdiction, either party may file suit under this paragraph in any state court which has jurisdiction over the parties.

I'd like to see your math on that, namely that a US contract become unenforceable in international contexts. Because, regardless of the RLA or not, that isn't in conformance with any other employment contract I've had working for a US corporation in an international context.

I asked that question of our MEC a few months ago and was told that was the response from the lawyers. By the way. That would be the same labor lawyer that wrote the IPA scope language, the same one that everybody wants to replace. How do you propose that we go about getting language like that in our contract?

One would wonder if that lawyer was lying when he said it was impossible, or lying to client for the clause's inclusion in their contract.

<removed due to reading comprehension fail>

Art Luby has told our MEC that the UPS Scope language is likely not enforceable on the international extraterritorial stuff, nice that they have the language but it also requires binding arbitration for any dispute and we all know how that will go. Wonder if IPA has ever filed a dispute ?

Scope, beyond what we have on the books (protecting the RLA area of ops) is a pipe dream and a fools errand. We will not be get anything near what some want so hopefully the proposal that is already on the table from the new scope committee is achievable. Grab much better data reports and do our best to prevent any type of job loss (furlough) against wet lease (for covered flying).

If purple pilots think we will bargain a scope clause that will increase our job footprint, beyond what the company will ordinarily do under their current business practices, we will all get tired, greyer and losing money waiting. No way we ever get released, maybe the NMB gets some pressure from the Flight Attendants unions but bottom line the NMB is a nasty governmental agency that serves business owners and the public, not employees.

Do you buy your kneepads in bulk or get them used from Stan?

He speaks truth.

Cool your jets and listen to folks who've been here awhile. Make no mistake, FDX will die on this hill.

You can keep whining but it doesn't change whats going to happen. You'll never get the, "scope clause", you want because Scope never was and never will be an issue. The company will do what they want. But yes, go ahead and give up real gains for the "ghost of Scope". So cry on this forum all you want but it won't change anything.

If TA1 would have passed, FedEx would be shopping or already have in place a 737 operator (see ASL), doing a large chunk of domestic flying. That’s how the scope was structured (block/credit). When they had to pay us, it would only be on 2.5 block vs 6 credit in a lot of instances. That’s why they wanted the change from credit to block. But have no fear, “they’ll never do that”.

You are kidding right? You think there are 737 freighters out there? You could have at least done a bit of looking to even post that laughable statement. Yep, You are right. FedEx wants to dramtically change its WHOLE operation to 737 domestic frieghters. Cmon, post something credible.

ASL isn't a US operator.

Showing how out of touch you are again. Look into Atlas Air, champ.

All Stan446 and some others wanted was that tiny bump in the pension scope and all the other give backs and lower than industry standard pay do not matter once your retired.