Wilson Says - FDX ALPA New Regime meets NMB
#61
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,123
You either want to reward the company, or you don't. That's it.
#62
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2023
Posts: 437
The reason that the retirement bump went for anyone who retired on or after May 30, 2023 is that was the day the TA was agreed to. It was not just some arbitrary date. If they were truly looking back to cover pilots who had already retired, why not go back to the beginning of the year or all the way back to the amendable date? So maybe, they were doing exactly like Tuck has said and covering everyone on the MSL on the date they had an agreement. We chose not to accept that agreement, so here we are.
#63
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: DA-40
Posts: 290
I understand that. What I mean is by negotiating for ourselves and current FedEx pilots. Ultimately it will (probably) be good for pilots to come on in the future. We have nothing to gain as a group by giving up negotiating capitol for guys who have already retired since amendable date. They should have planned for 2015 contract retirement.
#64
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2018
Posts: 296
ok. That’s your choice. But I bet it’s not in there. Unless you want to keep the same pay and other QOL givebacks. Along with probably an even lesser retirement. That’s just my opinion. I’m usually wrong
#65
On Reserve
Joined APC: Nov 2021
Posts: 22
I understand that. What I mean is by negotiating for ourselves and current FedEx pilots. Ultimately it will (probably) be good for pilots to come on in the future. We have nothing to gain as a group by giving up negotiating capitol for guys who have already retired since amendable date. They should have planned for 2015 contract retirement.
One thing I'm certain you're wrong about is using negotiating capitol on the amendable date. I'll certainly accept that my argument here will seem self-serving on the surface, but the underlying facts stand on their own. Our union should fight for "retro amendable date" because the precedent needs to be set with the company (Southwest did this BTW). In this, you're not really fighting for ONLY the 300+ who have retired since the amendable date, but for those on the seniority list now, who will be in the same position for future negotiations. This has already played out just like this in all our previous negotiations. So, if you don't do it now, you will have another group, a different group, of 300+ who be similarly situated... and they ARE current dues paying ALPA members.
This has been a pure business decision on the part of the company. I can certainly understand their MO because, based on our previous acquiescence, every day of delay during negotiations represents a finite net improvement to the company's balance sheet ("Just Culture" my a**). So... you, and others like you Bert, who are espousing this position can choose. But, you should do this for yourselves, every FDX ALPA member, not the "current 300+" (it's a nice thought BTW 👍.
#66
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2017
Posts: 278
- company will understand there is no financial penalty for a delay
-it will further fracture us for future negotiations (that is any Pilot nearing retirement will understand that our group has no appetite to secure contract wins for those retired). This will make it easier for the company to get qol givebacks. We can’t say we won’t take care of those folks nearing retirement (within 2-3 years of section 6 negotiations) and then chide them for taking care of themselves (read voting in substandard TAs). Pick one, we can’t have it both ways.
-we talk about just culture and doing what is right when it comes to the company but we need to start extending that to ourselves if we expect our Pilot culture to change
I don’t have a perfect roadmap how to work it in there. However, I do believe it will make us more united as a group for this and future negotiations. It will also be truly industry leading and send a resounding message to the company (retirement is too important and has been delayed too long).
Last edited by Yuko; 10-23-2023 at 03:55 PM.
#67
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2023
Posts: 437
I do think it is a lose situation for us with no retro retirement to amenable date.
- company will understand there is no financial penalty for a delay
-it will further fracture us for future negotiations (that is any Pilot nearing retirement will understand that our group has no appetite to secure contract wins for those retired). This will make it easier for the company to get qol givebacks. We can’t say we won’t take care of those folks nearing retirement (within 2-3 years of section 6 negotiations) and then chide them for taking care of themselves (read voting in substandard TAs). Pick one, we can’t have it both ways.
-we talk about just culture and doing what is right when it comes to the company but we need to start extending that to ourselves if we expect our Pilot culture to change
I don’t have a perfect roadmap how to work it in there. However, I do believe it will make us more united as a group for this and future negotiations. It will also be truly industry leading and send a resounding message to the company (retirement is too important and has been delayed too long).
- company will understand there is no financial penalty for a delay
-it will further fracture us for future negotiations (that is any Pilot nearing retirement will understand that our group has no appetite to secure contract wins for those retired). This will make it easier for the company to get qol givebacks. We can’t say we won’t take care of those folks nearing retirement (within 2-3 years of section 6 negotiations) and then chide them for taking care of themselves (read voting in substandard TAs). Pick one, we can’t have it both ways.
-we talk about just culture and doing what is right when it comes to the company but we need to start extending that to ourselves if we expect our Pilot culture to change
I don’t have a perfect roadmap how to work it in there. However, I do believe it will make us more united as a group for this and future negotiations. It will also be truly industry leading and send a resounding message to the company (retirement is too important and has been delayed too long).
Have you asked the MEC or retirement folks if this is even allowed? People on here saying that it is with no proof doesn’t mean that pursuing this isn’t a fool’s errand.
#68
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2017
Posts: 278
It would be great if we could get this in the next TA. However, no one has shown that any of our peers have done this.
Have you asked the MEC or retirement folks if this is even allowed? People on here saying that it is with no proof doesn’t mean that pursuing this isn’t a fool’s errand.
Have you asked the MEC or retirement folks if this is even allowed? People on here saying that it is with no proof doesn’t mean that pursuing this isn’t a fool’s errand.
#69
The only way you impose a penalty that might discourage future negotiation delays would be to actually impose a penalty greater than paying full retro. We all know that ain’t gonna happen.
Making the company pay full retro after a two to three year delay would have no effect on them choosing to delay again in the future. They still get the benefit of keeping that money in their pocket throughout the delay. If they pay on time with a TA the day after the amendable date, they’re still paying the same amount. With the delay, they keep that money working for them and pay the same later. So let’s not fool ourselves by thinking full retro for the delay is any kind of disincentive.
Making the company pay full retro after a two to three year delay would have no effect on them choosing to delay again in the future. They still get the benefit of keeping that money in their pocket throughout the delay. If they pay on time with a TA the day after the amendable date, they’re still paying the same amount. With the delay, they keep that money working for them and pay the same later. So let’s not fool ourselves by thinking full retro for the delay is any kind of disincentive.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post