Don’t feed the troll…

how many divorces are you on the hook to pay alimony for? It’s going to hurt real bad when the pilots vote this colossal piece of **** into the garbage bin. If an extra 2.5k a month in the pension is enough for you to sell out the rest of the pilot group well I guess we found just another independent contractor. I’m sure you have your schedule blocked as well. I cannot wait to see younger folks stick it to older folks for a
change.

In a nutshell, we’ve given up way too much in this contract and gained very little. Specifically, our potential jobs (and certainly our job security). And don’t even get me started on the threats to the future pilots…our kids (next generation’s) jobs, bc we’ve weakened every section of the contract for retirement (for guys who are leaving in the next 5 years)...chief among these weakened sections is section 1, scope! If you guys are good with screwing over everyone who’s not out the door in the next 5 years for an extra 30k a year, well, I guess we know your price.

For the rest of us, we see scope weakened, not strengthened. We see pay way short of our labors and efforts, we see back pay that is laughable, we see Substitution expanded not reduced…I could go on, but I’m sure you get the point…that basically our QOL will be less not more! Thus, I feel the vast majority will vote this down bc of the absurd concessions. Most understand that it’s not just the destination that’s important, but also the journey! Lastly I’d say, If you want to fixate on retirement at the expense of everything and everyone else all I can say is you will find that this pilot group will vote you and our feckless NC down in a few short days. That is all!

Respectively,

Tun

My responses are in bold embedded in your post. While we might lose $ over the short term, accepting pay rates below the market will cost us going forward in subsequent contracts. If we don’t address job security in light of the new direction, the company can do a lot of damage to us bin 4.5 years.

I understand if you’re close to 65 why you would accept this but I don’t think the younger crowd thinks the “minor little issues” are as minor or little since it will affect their careers. I hope we can get a ratifiable agreement soon so more guys retiring don’t get screwed. When Pat said it was unconscionable that guys were retiring under the old plan, he is right, but I don’t think that was directed at the young guys. It was directed at FedEx for dragging out the focused negotiations which cost all of those retirees.

Pretty much. Send this turd back where it came from and use the leverage we finally have before they replace us with drones.

You won’t see retirement bro……

From another source:So, Section 1 - Scope…..



Let me spell this out. And again, someone please correct me if I am completely wrong, maybe I don’t understand the verbiage, and I will happily say I am wrong if can be proven otherwise, but I am pretty certain THIS TA REMOVES THE ONLY WET LEASE LIMITATION WE HAVE IN OUR CURRENT CONTRACT!



They have red-lined all parts that included “Except for the minimum two aircraft wet leasing referred to above, during the bid periods described in this paragraph, the Company shall not wet lease more than the net gain of trunk aircraft scheduled to be added and brought into service in any calendar year.”



So, currently the company can always wet-lease two aircraft, for up to four bid periods per calendar year, without penalty. Above that they ARE LIMITED BASED ON THE NET GAIN OF TRUNK AIRCRAFT BROUGHT INTO SERVICE. So, if they cancel all future orders today, they cannot just wet-lease more than two while they park/retire current trunk airplanes and don’t bring more online. THIS IS HUGE as it protects what we have defined as Domestic and International flying.



I had to listen to the FDX ALPA Podcast multiple times as I felt I had to be hearing them incorrectly, but two different committe members said at least 2x (at minute 11:30 and minute 13) that the Comapny can wet-lease as much as they want right now. THIS IS INCORRECT INFORMATION based on the language of the contract. They can do as much as they want for outside of the “domestic and international” definitions (ie. within Europe)



They removed the limitation in the TA, and the penalty system even pays LOWER if they are REDUCING TOTAL FLEET SIZE! It is spelled out in their stated example! At minute 10 of the podcast, they state the exact opposite of what is actually written in the new blue language. These are the people telling us to vote for this.



However, if this TA is signed, what is to stop the following scenario:

-The company stops hiring indefinitely…as in never again.

-The company cancels all future orders as soon as the pilot group signs this TA.

-The company continues to retire airframes with the MD11s as currently planned, then the Airbus, then the 757 and eventually park or sell the 777 and 767 fleets. It will take several years for sure, but could easily happen with 10-15 years, perhaps much, much sooner.

-They just let the attrition of pilots leaving through retirement and ill-will slowly whittle down the crew force as they need and only keep as many aircraft in the trunk fleet as the current shrinking seniority list can staff. THEY NEVER EVEN HAVE TO FURLOUGH!

-Throughout this whole process above, they just continue to increase the wet-leasing to the lowest bidder as it is “economically necessary” under section 1.b.4.

-There will be penalty payments, but someone could use a spreadsheet to plan them all out…we basically just gave them a planned map as to how to get rid of the trunk operated aircraft and exactly how much it will cost them to do so.



And just like that, the entire FDX master seniority list is completely eroded over a block of time and FedEx moves along its merry way as all its air-freight movement is all done by contract flying….so any potential gain anywhere in the contract is eventually worthless.



ASL has confirmed orders for lots of 767s….they really don’t need those in Europe….what’s to stop them from setting up “ASL America”?



The Company has already stated publicly they want to use more non-purple tails, and it can be read on page 13 of the FedEx Investors Meeting Transcript – June 29, 2022. Link to full transcript:



https://s21.q4cdn.com/665674268/file...3-Q231rOn8YMR4 (https://s21.q4cdn.com/665674268/file...3-Q231rOn8YMR4)

Ok, I'll chime in too.
These are my points like it or not.:)
1. I'm a 1996 and my new hire pay was insulting. it was $2,000/month. After I finished, line pay was $33/month. Thank god I had a military job so I could at least pay my mortgage. I had to pay for my lodging while my friends at AA/DL/UA were given rooms. I wasn't proud to be at FedEx when I got hired, it was my last choice. 1996 wasn't a boom year for hiring anywhere but I was happy to have what I figured was a stepping stone to the majors.
Things fortunately improved and FedEX is and has been a great place to work at. But after the load the pilots carried during covid, we deserve better than this TA.
2. I don't know any of the MEC or NC members but I DID have faith in them to get us the best contract in the industry.
3. I will definitely be a NO vote because I feel there are certain points, though maybe minor, that should be changed.
4. I am very disappointed in the retirement especially for out guys hitting 65 before 2027. The FAE cap should be at least 400K and there should be not be step increase up to 2027, the 338K cap should be at DOS. The company can't afford to pay only 6,500 more per year for all retirees at DOS? I know of many airlines that went bankrupt, and no, I don't want FedEx to go bankrupt but this contract isn't going to do that. The SMU is a farce and should be a big reason this is voted down. AVA changes, the change to vaca cancel and the 24ch restriction are a few more reasons.
5. OP doesn't obviously sit reserve at FedEX.
6. It is a big deal to people with a long career. And no, it wasn't a priority for the NC.
Voting the TA down is part of the process. DL did it and had better results
I'm going to drink bourbon now, let my 8 year old finish the rest of the post because I have bush to look at and a horse to feed I guess.

I agree.

BoomerBus(Parody Account) <------ Just update your profile name and we will all salute you.

This may be true too. He/She/They have been MIA since the actual TA was released.

After initially viewing the videos and reading through the TA, I found myself disappointed. There are clear concessions regarding scope, R-24, substitution, and a number of other topics. My disappointment turned to anger…“This is the thanks I get for flying through the pandemic while my friends telecommuted, for being quarantined in hotel rooms. For showing up on time and helping to make huge profits for FedEx when others were at home asleep in their beds?”

I have always thought that pilots should not be the primary negotiators in this arena. It is simply not our forte, and these are the results…With that said it obviously benefits The Company to drag this out as long as possible. There will never be full retro pay for any additional time taken to modify the agreement, and if we reject this we will be perceived as entitled and selfish. I can see the spin now: “FedEx pilots reject $400,000/year salaries.”

Hypothetically, if there is a “No” vote where does that leave us?...A negotiating committee that must be disbanded, a Union leadership we don’t trust, and a fractured pilot group still looking at many months if not years before a new agreement can be negotiated and ratified.

A 99% strike vote surely resonated, which is a primary reason we are here. However it comes down to numbers now. The time for knee jerk reactions has passed. We had an opportunity to “strike while the iron was hot,” but is it still?…I am uncertain. What I do know is that I am tired…

At a fundamental level what is the Time Value of (your) Money? Please run the numbers in your own personalized scenario…What kind of raise two years from now would be required if this TA were to be rejected in order to offset the present value of the raise, signing bonus, and compounding interest on the compensation package as it now stands? Each of us has to remove emotion from the equation and decide for themselves what is best for their own future.

I have been struggling to understand how so many on the MEC voted to send this to us. What I am left with is that this is the best that they felt they could do….Regardless of the outcome I appreciate their efforts on our behalf.