No one left behind!
10-04-2023, 03:55 PM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2017
Posts: 261
Originally Posted by Tuck
So kind of weird that the campaign statements for block reps don't appear to include a guarantee they will only back a TA that offers full retirement benefits to amendable date. Probably a good thing as that is very unlikely to ever get passed - like saying I won't support any TA that doesn't have $900/hour pay - just another way of saying you will always vote NO. And there are quite a lot of people that do always vote NO and advertise it here regularly.
I see your line of thinking and would like to know more. How many retirees since amenable date is acceptable for no retirement improvement? My number is zero. Since amenable date, we will reach about +500 retirees at end of 2024 then hit near 700 at end of 2025. Would 700 be acceptable if our negotiations dragged out until then? How about 500? Something in between?
I guess I am in the camp that I hope enough see it as important enough issue that “unlikely” becomes standard and core feature of how we value our members.
Everyone has to take care of their self interest, in light of that do you think folks near retirement will be more willing to accept substandard areas in other parts of the TA knowing that they need to get theirs now (retirement improvement vs being another retirees who did not make the cut off date)?
I think it should be a core part of our CBA that if you are on property at amenable date and retire thereafter one should always get the retirement bump negotiated. Retirement is one of the Crown Jewels of this place and to deny that to retirees just does not sit right. TA 1.0 was all about retirement. I have inquired about this on the road and folks seem to be 50-50. As a junior guy here, it is interesting to see the sentiment that one was just not lucky enough to make the cut off date (i.e. 300 retirees with no improvement in TA1.0).
Thanks for chiming in and your future reply.
10-05-2023, 07:03 PM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MD11 FO
Posts: 1,109
Originally Posted by Yuko
Tuck
I see your line of thinking and would like to know more. How many retirees since amenable date is acceptable for no retirement improvement? My number is zero. Since amenable date, we will reach about +500 retirees at end of 2024 then hit near 700 at end of 2025. Would 700 be acceptable if our negotiations dragged out until then? How about 500? Something in between?
I guess I am in the camp that I hope enough see it as important enough issue that “unlikely” becomes standard and core feature of how we value our members.
Everyone has to take care of their self interest, in light of that do you think folks near retirement will be more willing to accept substandard areas in other parts of the TA knowing that they need to get theirs now (retirement improvement vs being another retirees who did not make the cut off date)?
I think it should be a core part of our CBA that if you are on property at amenable date and retire thereafter one should always get the retirement bump negotiated. Retirement is one of the Crown Jewels of this place and to deny that to retirees just does not sit right. TA 1.0 was all about retirement. I have inquired about this on the road and folks seem to be 50-50. As a junior guy here, it is interesting to see the sentiment that one was just not lucky enough to make the cut off date (i.e. 300 retirees with no improvement in TA1.0).
Thanks for chiming in and your future reply.
I see your line of thinking and would like to know more. How many retirees since amenable date is acceptable for no retirement improvement? My number is zero. Since amenable date, we will reach about +500 retirees at end of 2024 then hit near 700 at end of 2025. Would 700 be acceptable if our negotiations dragged out until then? How about 500? Something in between?
I guess I am in the camp that I hope enough see it as important enough issue that “unlikely” becomes standard and core feature of how we value our members.
Everyone has to take care of their self interest, in light of that do you think folks near retirement will be more willing to accept substandard areas in other parts of the TA knowing that they need to get theirs now (retirement improvement vs being another retirees who did not make the cut off date)?
I think it should be a core part of our CBA that if you are on property at amenable date and retire thereafter one should always get the retirement bump negotiated. Retirement is one of the Crown Jewels of this place and to deny that to retirees just does not sit right. TA 1.0 was all about retirement. I have inquired about this on the road and folks seem to be 50-50. As a junior guy here, it is interesting to see the sentiment that one was just not lucky enough to make the cut off date (i.e. 300 retirees with no improvement in TA1.0).
Thanks for chiming in and your future reply.
10-06-2023, 02:25 AM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,057
Originally Posted by Tuck
So we are the worst in the industry? I know you've been here awhile since you came over from your regional - were we always the worst? Why did you pick a place to come to with the worst work rules?
PM played "fast and loose" - in his words - please expand about this statement.
He said "yes" to R16? We proposed the changes in long call reserve - Company would have loved to keep R24 with base hotel stby like it is - they don't want to change it, R16 was the compromise.
There were changes to DFT? Did you even read the TA?
PM played "fast and loose" - in his words - please expand about this statement.
He said "yes" to R16? We proposed the changes in long call reserve - Company would have loved to keep R24 with base hotel stby like it is - they don't want to change it, R16 was the compromise.
There were changes to DFT? Did you even read the TA?
Yes, PM said yes to R16. He TA'd it. A concession he tried to sell as a win, just like you are doing.
Yes, I was at an ALPA regional a couple lifetimes ago, then an ALPA major, then another major, then here. I don't fault you for this being your only airline job, that's awesome. Still, your industry analysis is as weak now as it was during the 2015 TA you were so happy to vote in.
So, to help you understand by spelling it out: when I say "industry worst" I mean among our peers, not among the regionals.
Tuck, to set the baseline, you were asked what gains TA1 had that were worthy of voting it in. Of the 3 you were able to come up with, the fix of the company-created scheduled hotel receipt stupidity was a major win for you. Really, difficult to take you seriously after that.
10-06-2023, 07:40 AM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,057
Originally Posted by Tuck
...- were we always the worst? Why did you pick a place to come to with the worst work rules?
...?
...?
Our CBA is becoming worst in class because we keep voting in major concessions while having our collective heads Tuckd in the sand, not looking around the industry. 2015 gave us the loss of passover pay when combined with our current Bidding system, which makes our System Bids worst in the industry class our company belongs to. Our CBA ranking, if you will, among the top airlines in the US, has declined. Just look at guys leaving here by the dozens now. Wake up dude. And 2015 was for a cost neutral contract to the company.
WE keep voting in POS contracts like we did in 2015! Well, YOU did. And you almost did it again a couple of months ago, and you are still on here arguing FOR TA1. Wow.
We barely missed becoming that much worse in QOL, no thanks to you.
10-06-2023, 08:41 AM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,057
Apologies for coming across so bitter. Truth is, I got the best gig I could imagine here, and feel really grateful about it. But thanks to some seniority I know. And from my experience here, it seems that today it takes more seniority to "hold" an equivalent QOL than it did before 2015CBA.
Many of our junior guys are voting with their feet. By this time next year it could be over 150-200? guys who will have left for the legacies. All smart individuals who just see where this is going after TA1, and the mentality that got us there. It is concerning to me as well. I don't want to go anywhere else and came here for a career, as 99% of our pilots came here for.
I don't really hold it against you Tuck, and I took it personal there, my apologies... I don't hold int against our bros and sisters here who have been educated by ALPA, it's the union that has let me down. Thing is, two lifetimes ago for me, ALPA - in concert with the company, negotiated Pref Bidding over line bidding. It was sold to us as a huge win for both pilots and FA's. Well, as it turned out, it was catastrophic to QOL, not exaggerating. Which is why I left there. I felt TA1 had the potential to be catastrophic to our seniority list. Just my take.
We have been settling for much less than the mega wealth we have helped earn for this corporation. Let's not do it again.
Peace.
Many of our junior guys are voting with their feet. By this time next year it could be over 150-200? guys who will have left for the legacies. All smart individuals who just see where this is going after TA1, and the mentality that got us there. It is concerning to me as well. I don't want to go anywhere else and came here for a career, as 99% of our pilots came here for.
I don't really hold it against you Tuck, and I took it personal there, my apologies... I don't hold int against our bros and sisters here who have been educated by ALPA, it's the union that has let me down. Thing is, two lifetimes ago for me, ALPA - in concert with the company, negotiated Pref Bidding over line bidding. It was sold to us as a huge win for both pilots and FA's. Well, as it turned out, it was catastrophic to QOL, not exaggerating. Which is why I left there. I felt TA1 had the potential to be catastrophic to our seniority list. Just my take.
We have been settling for much less than the mega wealth we have helped earn for this corporation. Let's not do it again.
Peace.
10-10-2023, 11:07 AM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MD11 FO
Posts: 1,109
Originally Posted by CloudSailor
Apologies for coming across so bitter. Truth is, I got the best gig I could imagine here, and feel really grateful about it. But thanks to some seniority I know. And from my experience here, it seems that today it takes more seniority to "hold" an equivalent QOL than it did before 2015CBA.
Many of our junior guys are voting with their feet. By this time next year it could be over 150-200? guys who will have left for the legacies. All smart individuals who just see where this is going after TA1, and the mentality that got us there. It is concerning to me as well. I don't want to go anywhere else and came here for a career, as 99% of our pilots came here for.
I don't really hold it against you Tuck, and I took it personal there, my apologies... I don't hold int against our bros and sisters here who have been educated by ALPA, it's the union that has let me down. Thing is, two lifetimes ago for me, ALPA - in concert with the company, negotiated Pref Bidding over line bidding. It was sold to us as a huge win for both pilots and FA's. Well, as it turned out, it was catastrophic to QOL, not exaggerating. Which is why I left there. I felt TA1 had the potential to be catastrophic to our seniority list. Just my take.
We have been settling for much less than the mega wealth we have helped earn for this corporation. Let's not do it again.
Peace.
Many of our junior guys are voting with their feet. By this time next year it could be over 150-200? guys who will have left for the legacies. All smart individuals who just see where this is going after TA1, and the mentality that got us there. It is concerning to me as well. I don't want to go anywhere else and came here for a career, as 99% of our pilots came here for.
I don't really hold it against you Tuck, and I took it personal there, my apologies... I don't hold int against our bros and sisters here who have been educated by ALPA, it's the union that has let me down. Thing is, two lifetimes ago for me, ALPA - in concert with the company, negotiated Pref Bidding over line bidding. It was sold to us as a huge win for both pilots and FA's. Well, as it turned out, it was catastrophic to QOL, not exaggerating. Which is why I left there. I felt TA1 had the potential to be catastrophic to our seniority list. Just my take.
We have been settling for much less than the mega wealth we have helped earn for this corporation. Let's not do it again.
Peace.
We have the new block 7 rep who says we had the best leverage in our history - all the time while he and other newly elected MEC members were flying tons of extra during negotiations. Personal choices of course but THAT is the leverage we had and didn't use. Not a strike vote that can never end up as a strike.
Truth is the more guys that leave may actually give us some leverage. Doubt we will be hiring anytime soon but also don't think management wants a permanent stain on the brand name - more guys that leave and tell their buds that Fedex is no longer a first choice maybe that leads to some better outcomes. I'm positive the strike vote won't - positive guys posting about demanding more won't result in any improvements. Doubt this current crew force will actually fly their lines - especially when the new leadership loudly did the opposite last time.
I think it's funny when you think we have the worst CBA in the industry - excuse me, among our peers. Guessing you weren't very engaged until recently as you seem to understand very little about what we asked for and what we ended up with. But hey I think you've been angry since the day you were born. Can't imagine what your past carriers - the ones you say you left to come here - thought about you.
10-11-2023, 06:52 AM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2023
Posts: 300
Originally Posted by CloudSailor
Apologies for coming across so bitter. Truth is, I got the best gig I could imagine here, and feel really grateful about it. But thanks to some seniority I know. And from my experience here, it seems that today it takes more seniority to "hold" an equivalent QOL than it did before 2015CBA.
Many of our junior guys are voting with their feet. By this time next year it could be over 150-200? guys who will have left for the legacies. All smart individuals who just see where this is going after TA1, and the mentality that got us there. It is concerning to me as well. I don't want to go anywhere else and came here for a career, as 99% of our pilots came here for.
I don't really hold it against you Tuck, and I took it personal there, my apologies... I don't hold int against our bros and sisters here who have been educated by ALPA, it's the union that has let me down. Thing is, two lifetimes ago for me, ALPA - in concert with the company, negotiated Pref Bidding over line bidding. It was sold to us as a huge win for both pilots and FA's. Well, as it turned out, it was catastrophic to QOL, not exaggerating. Which is why I left there. I felt TA1 had the potential to be catastrophic to our seniority list. Just my take.
We have been settling for much less than the mega wealth we have helped earn for this corporation. Let's not do it again.
Peace.
Many of our junior guys are voting with their feet. By this time next year it could be over 150-200? guys who will have left for the legacies. All smart individuals who just see where this is going after TA1, and the mentality that got us there. It is concerning to me as well. I don't want to go anywhere else and came here for a career, as 99% of our pilots came here for.
I don't really hold it against you Tuck, and I took it personal there, my apologies... I don't hold int against our bros and sisters here who have been educated by ALPA, it's the union that has let me down. Thing is, two lifetimes ago for me, ALPA - in concert with the company, negotiated Pref Bidding over line bidding. It was sold to us as a huge win for both pilots and FA's. Well, as it turned out, it was catastrophic to QOL, not exaggerating. Which is why I left there. I felt TA1 had the potential to be catastrophic to our seniority list. Just my take.
We have been settling for much less than the mega wealth we have helped earn for this corporation. Let's not do it again.
Peace.
Hopefully people learn that they can't be engaged and involved only towards the end of negotiations. We need people to do their part from day 1.
10-15-2023, 10:16 PM
#28
Heavy Driver
Joined APC: Dec 2021
Position: 747
Posts: 20
This is a great thread and a GREAT idea. You guys have my support and feel free to REACH out to your BROWN brothers. We are all in this crazy freight business together. Management is making millions while we are literally GETTING our butts kicked daily.
10-16-2023, 04:59 AM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Posts: 307
Originally Posted by Yuko
There is a lot of work for the next TA but I want to focus on one key item.
I believe retirement for all since amenable date should be a must have. I understand that number will grow from the 300, but it will serve a couple purposes
-rally all under the same umbrella. I saw more than 500+ senior block voters vote no per the Union result email. (So you meet one of those gals or guys thank them for that). Can you imagine the energy we can harness if we ensure that this feature is a must have for next TA. We are not the ones who delayed raising the retirement payout limit, the company did. They did it for over 2 decades. It is time to pay up.
-it will set the precedent that you can no longer drag your feet on negotiations. So what happens on the next TA that does not include it? We vote it down and again and again. The FedEx our founder built is gone (it is natural for successful businesses to take our new path). It is all about efficiency and stock prices. This is not a family airline, this a business and that business has costs. The time for COVID emails and tv interviews of what was accomplished are over. It is time to pay. If our company states it is the best cargo airline on the planet per JD email then our compensation package should reflect that. We did not stall negotiations for 2 years, expecting the economy to take a downturn or the majors to roll out meager TAs/AIPs. (Economy is soft landing and each day it looks like it will be a touch and go). Actually, we started early, 6 months, expecting our labor would have born fruit for a great TA. It did not.
What is leverage? I heard gloom then lo and behold we got significant business from a competitor for Aug onward. Is this not leverage? Leverage going forward will be fluid.
Do you believe our competitors will not attempt to pounce on our labor woes for the next couple months to years it takes for the next TA? I believe they will. Peak is coming, UPS negotiations are coming
Lastly, there is so much talk about division but I have had more meaningful conversations with yes voters since failure. Guess what? They want the same thing we all want (they wanted it pre failure as well), an industry leading TA, we just have different ideas of how to get there.
I know there are folks up and down the seniority chain who wants what we all want - an industry leading TA commensurate with our labor and the profitability we bring to the company (past and potential).
So as you make your TA must have list and for the surveys, please save space for not a single pilot left behind since amenable date for improved retirement package!
14-20 years left at this place, Let’s GO!
I believe retirement for all since amenable date should be a must have. I understand that number will grow from the 300, but it will serve a couple purposes
-rally all under the same umbrella. I saw more than 500+ senior block voters vote no per the Union result email. (So you meet one of those gals or guys thank them for that). Can you imagine the energy we can harness if we ensure that this feature is a must have for next TA. We are not the ones who delayed raising the retirement payout limit, the company did. They did it for over 2 decades. It is time to pay up.
-it will set the precedent that you can no longer drag your feet on negotiations. So what happens on the next TA that does not include it? We vote it down and again and again. The FedEx our founder built is gone (it is natural for successful businesses to take our new path). It is all about efficiency and stock prices. This is not a family airline, this a business and that business has costs. The time for COVID emails and tv interviews of what was accomplished are over. It is time to pay. If our company states it is the best cargo airline on the planet per JD email then our compensation package should reflect that. We did not stall negotiations for 2 years, expecting the economy to take a downturn or the majors to roll out meager TAs/AIPs. (Economy is soft landing and each day it looks like it will be a touch and go). Actually, we started early, 6 months, expecting our labor would have born fruit for a great TA. It did not.
What is leverage? I heard gloom then lo and behold we got significant business from a competitor for Aug onward. Is this not leverage? Leverage going forward will be fluid.
Do you believe our competitors will not attempt to pounce on our labor woes for the next couple months to years it takes for the next TA? I believe they will. Peak is coming, UPS negotiations are coming
Lastly, there is so much talk about division but I have had more meaningful conversations with yes voters since failure. Guess what? They want the same thing we all want (they wanted it pre failure as well), an industry leading TA, we just have different ideas of how to get there.
I know there are folks up and down the seniority chain who wants what we all want - an industry leading TA commensurate with our labor and the profitability we bring to the company (past and potential).
So as you make your TA must have list and for the surveys, please save space for not a single pilot left behind since amenable date for improved retirement package!
14-20 years left at this place, Let’s GO!
11-19-2023, 07:56 PM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2017
Posts: 261
It is hard to tell how TA2.0 will turn out. I do not want a TA1.1 (increase pay rates, tidy scope and keep TA1.0).
We have work to do on retirement package, pay rates, retro, scope language and those efficiencies that are really qol givebacks.
You said NO for splitting the pension with the pancake plan.
We said NO for a substandard deal during the most profitable time in our history.
We said NO for the first time ever under ALPA
It is time we gear up for NO for leaving a single member behind for retirement since amenable date.
I believe if our Union Leadership make the hard choice (with our input) to pursue no one left behind it would be truly industry leading and a first. It would also get more senior MSL members on board with a strategy for a TA2.0 vs 1.1. Lastly, it will start to address the penalty free zone we reward the company with for lengthy section 6.
This a long game not just for the near retiree, but to set a precedent for the junior MSL force (50%+ hired in the last ~6 years). You have your list, I have mine.
But, until the new surveys arrive save some room on it for true no one left behind since amenable date for retirement bump and true retro that appropriately rewards what we consistently bring to the table.
Add: the 300 retirees grow to over 500 by end of 2024. Let us not be willing to give the company a pass on ~10% of our current MSL.
Email your reps!
We have work to do on retirement package, pay rates, retro, scope language and those efficiencies that are really qol givebacks.
You said NO for splitting the pension with the pancake plan.
We said NO for a substandard deal during the most profitable time in our history.
We said NO for the first time ever under ALPA
It is time we gear up for NO for leaving a single member behind for retirement since amenable date.
I believe if our Union Leadership make the hard choice (with our input) to pursue no one left behind it would be truly industry leading and a first. It would also get more senior MSL members on board with a strategy for a TA2.0 vs 1.1. Lastly, it will start to address the penalty free zone we reward the company with for lengthy section 6.
This a long game not just for the near retiree, but to set a precedent for the junior MSL force (50%+ hired in the last ~6 years). You have your list, I have mine.
But, until the new surveys arrive save some room on it for true no one left behind since amenable date for retirement bump and true retro that appropriately rewards what we consistently bring to the table.
Add: the 300 retirees grow to over 500 by end of 2024. Let us not be willing to give the company a pass on ~10% of our current MSL.
Email your reps!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
