It's mind boggling why we have FedEx pilots (specifically the 3-4 characters on these threads) going all out trying to rationalize sub-industry standard language in our Scope section when Raj and Co. have publicly and repeatedly said that they WILL outsource wherever they can to line the pockets of DE Shaw and themselves (during DRIVE announcement, it was announced executive bonuses would be tied more directly to stock performance).

Making reference to Eastern, Pan-am, Braniff, etc in an attempt to brush away the importance of scope language, to me, shows that there is a serious lack of understanding (or intentional attempt at distraction?) of what Scope actually is intended for. Those airlines failing had nothing to do with outsourcing and everything to do with deregulation and raiders like Frank Lorenzo and Carl Icahn who destroyed families and lives with their greed. To bring Scope into that discussion is literally comparing apples to grapefruits...

The "shut up and color" or "give something to get something" mentality needs to go the way of the 727.

Got Scope?

 

Why: A no vote stands in the way of the new Section 28.

Well said.

Going to go and shut up and color now.

Got scope?

 

Why can’t you post it here? Paraphrase it.

 

No, I think that it is mind bottling that those who profess to know the importance of scope and know that ours is below industry standard are just now chiming in. Didn't you read the contract before, or are you just now reading it? Raj hasn't said they are outsourcing everything they can. I am not going to get into specifics, but you really need to look at what was said. It isn't all doom and gloom. Just because an airline has 24 pages in Section 1 doesn't mean it has better scope. Saying that there are block hour ratios doesn't mean that their scope is protecting their jobs. You could argue that a ratio based flight hour scope means that more main line jobs will be lost than regional jobs. I don't know, nor do I care, what those ratios are, but thinking that is going to protect all mainline flying shows little imagination regarding what a company could do.

No one is saying to shut up and color or that you need to give something to get something. What I am saying is know the risk and reward of how you vote. These are negotiations, not a hold up. You can't demand that the company hands over their wallet.

Linepilot63, sorry that the company told you what they did about future hiring and movement. Not sure that is their fault though. Do you think they did that maliciously? Do you think any airline tells their new hires that things are about to turn here, so you better leave now?

Don't put you mad before your money. Don't create a problem that isn't there. This too shall pass.

 

How can you judge the risk/reward of your vote? You know the contents of the TA you are voting on, but no idea on the subsequent TA. Delta voted a TA down around ~2016 and it ended up getting them a better deal. They had proponents of the first TA predicting hazards of voting it down, which ended up being untrue.

 

Pin, again, the "you should have known better our scope sucked before applying" approach is the same straw-man argument you keep making over and over again...And before we inevitably go down the "scope didn't poll high enough" in a single poll 2 years ago argument, I'll counterpoint with the fact that that poll took place when the intention was to complete negotiations in 12 months. Remember when our pilots didn't even know the meaning of the words Strike Authorization Vote?

The fact is that management will exploit our weak scope, and every other weak section they can. It's their JOB to do so! Ignoring or not addressing the immediate issue of scope will have a negative impact on any purple pilot not retiring, or in the top % of the seniority, in the next 5-10 years.

As far as Management's outsourcing strategy that you seem to believe is not a threat, maybe you should go back and listen/read the earning calls from the last 2 quarters, or the DRIVE day presentation. In the mean time, here is some light reading:


https://www.freightwaves.com/news/fe...5EZcJuNGc5Ssz0

https://www.freightwaves.com/news/fe...VS2xNlXgnnoRNY

 

Regarding hiring, I think it's laughable how incorrect their hiring needs and projections were, a real indication of their lack of competence. Yet, another reason the entire rest of the industry runs bids with significantly more frequency than we do, but that's not the FedEx way. I expect that out of any airline though. Any airline will hang you out to dry given the opportunity without hesitation, which actually seems to be something the people that only know Fred's FedEx don't seem to understand. I made my bed and I'm sleeping in it just fine. These are all things that you brought up. Which I might add, I must've really struck a nerve with you for you to have dug all the way back to my posts from 2021. Consider me flattered.

Those 24 pages aren't for coloring I promise you that. Your blatant ignorance for the rest of the industry is showing, so I'd suggest maybe doing a bit of research yourself or go ahead and just put your foot in your mouth now before you look even more disconnected.

I'll just go ahead and mark you down for a scared Yes vote, because ALPA says the next NC won't do better, because obviously no one could/would do better than them, maybe they can, maybe they can't, that's why we'll get to vote again then too if the first one doesn't pass. You probably voted yes to C2015 too, not that you would be or anyone is willing to admit. Plenty of guys that were here when that was voted in have stated it's starting to look eerily similar.

I plan to take a look at the entirety of the TA and vote appropriately. There's nothing more I'd love to see than our current NC bring us a TA that is truly industry leading, and yes that includes scope. Job security is important. I am not an automatic no vote, but even more importantly I also most definitely not a scared yes vote. I believe I saw someone say "actually read it this time" on JF today, and I most certainly plan to.

And find me a new hire at any airline that read any CBA cover to cover prior to being on property and I'll buy the beer the rest of our careers. Heck, I bet the majority of our current pilot group hasn't read it cover to cover. We choose airlines based off where our former colleagues work and make the best decision for us and our families. We ask them the good, the bad, and the ugly. Not one time did international scope come up, it wasn't a problem then. Management wasn't telling us to our faces back then that they were going to outsource our jobs. This is FedEx, "the greatest job in aviation," never in a million years did I think something as important as scope could have such large gaping holes in it either, not at a well regarded successful large outfit like this, but I guess that cat is out of the bag now. Because if it were that bad, they would've been already exploiting it, because as the other poster said, it's managements job to do so. Fred made this place to the exception to that rule, but now I'd like to introduce you to our team of modern day executives who didn't found this company. Maybe if the company would've actually followed through with the targeted strategy we'd have a new CBA already, one with far less value than we are striving for right now, because the goal post has moved, just the same way it has with scope. We wouldn't be jumping up and down screaming to save our jobs before it's too late, because it's not, yet. You should be happy your new hires are ready to fight for the future. Go ahead and arrest me because "probably good enough" isn't something we're interested in.

 

And he still has the audacity, or dare I say ignorance to try and tell us scope isn't an issue. I'm going with ignorance.

Got scope?

 

Because he's scared to vote No. Simple.

What happened with that first Delta contract back in 2016 seems extremely similar to what we're already starting to see, and we don't even have the TA yet.

 

Kind of like the pax carriers that didn't predict the rate of recovery of travel and let too many pilots go.

I didn't expect you to read the contract cover to cover before coming here. However, you have stated that Section 1 is the most important section to your job security, yet evidently, you didn't take the time to read that either to compare to your former legacy airline.

Listen, I'm not saying to vote yes. I don't know how I will vote until I read the whole TA. I do think it is funny that all these scope experts suddenly came out of the woodwork. Good luck finding happiness anywhere with your attitude. Sucks to be you!