And TA 1 would of had our largest pilot group (767) starting above them at $382.53 and going to $394 in three weeks. Alot of the TA was underwhelming but not this part if you're a 767 or Airbus pilot.

DL is also ridding themselves of 767-300. The rates should be compared to 787 and A330. Those are the pax industry replacements for the 767-300ER’s.

As I recognized/predicted many posts ago - you are stating the quiet part out loud. The title of this thread is - "Let's Talk 757 Pay Rates"

My stance remains, our colllective goal should be: Pay every aircraft, every seat, ever year, at industry standard rates. Exceeding those rates in any jet would clearly meet that goal.

(Remember: there's multiple solutions here)

Anything less is being disingenious, especially when asking younger guys (and all future new hires) to buy into the MBCB Plan.

In Transparency, Integrity and Unity (for Everyone),
DLax

Yep, should probably base our entire rates around an airplane Delta is planning on parking within the next 5 years (and have industry low pay in the 757 and 777 because of it).

During previous negotiation cycles, the company didn't want to pay us a higher rate for the 777 because they said something very close to "we already pay top of the industry widebody rates for 767 and A300 that exceed what our competitors pay for the 777"

Nowadays, we have pilots here that have forgotten that and are arguing that we should give up being paid top of the industry widebody rates for our 767F and A300 aircraft. Ever think that other unions didn't bother negotiating hard for 767-3 rates because their companies are parking them rapidly, or in the case of AA, not even flying them at all anymore?

What is the quiet part?

What are the multiple solutions you keep talking about?

Again, I am not against getting better rates for the 757, I just think using the argument of industry standard is a double edged sword.

It's not when you use the company's prior statements against them in negotiation.

History Lesson
 

Our Airbus rates have always been tied to Legacy rates. Even before the 777 was on FedEx property. We’re not changing it now just so some folks that benefited from it the past 20 years can also get a pension bump before jumping ship.

Nobody is shooting for industry standard anyway, so it’s all a moot point. Industry leading hourly rates of pay.

When a new wide body (larger than the MD) was to come on property, the intent was to have it pay above the WB rate. Just like the A380 rates. We lost the grievance, but made up for it through BKO.

What do you beleive are valid justifications to make to the mediator/nmb? And what exactly would that be justifying?

And from a previous post, it doesnt matter if we have 5 year wb captains and ups doesn't. Just like it doesnt matter that legacies had one or two year nb upgrades. Its all cyclical and can change on a whim. Its irrelavant what aircraft management needs to make their business model work, or the demogrophics of the current pilot force. Pay rates should be industry standard or industry leading regardless of how few pilots are on them.

Keep thinking - you’ll figure those things out.

Is being “not against” the same as being “for”?

Is this “double edge sword” sharp on either side, or dull on both? …like yours always seems to be.

The idea that our pilot group is, or should be, afraid to stand up for ourselves has proven to be untrue - especially among the younger guys.

Unity and fortitude will be required all the way to the end zone.

I post to present data, information & some insight, and to hopefully promote useful discussion & debate. Useful meaning an actual position or solution is ultimately articulated.

Your motivation and goals appear different.

VR,
DLax

Justinfacts is making a valid point that many of you seem to want to connveniently ignore. If this next TA is now about matching or exceeding industry pay rates no matter what, then the specifics in that goal DO matter. Like it or not, our goals require justifcation and logic with the NMB involved and really any time during section 6 negotiations. If the DL/UA/AA A350 rates are the only acceptable target for our 777 rate, then what is the logic that allows us to ignore the fact that those same airlines don't pay that rate to their 767-300 pilots?
Do you really think our NC (regardless of who that might be) is going to be able to get in front of the company and the NMB and demand DL A350 pay for every FedEx WB pilot?
Connect the dots for me on that. We're going to use the industry as a benchmark, but only the parts that we like?

Yes asking for industry standard could give us PBS. Company would jump on that for industry pay rates. Then we would be fat another 500+ pilots.

This is so easy. We’ll just index off of UPS and beat their pay rates by 2%. That makes the top rate $396. We just need to move to one rate. All WB. And match their guarantee. 975 hours per year.

Thats the equivalent of $437/hour at min BLG of 884. I think if we can get the 757 to WB, the crew force would be willing to accept that it’s less than industry leading.

It also has the dual benefit of comparing us only to UPS, because we have a lot of the crew force that thinks it’s inappropriate to compare us to legacy peers.

I made no judgements on what rates to use. I was simply trying to make the point that it doesn't matter that we can upgrade at 5 years and UPS cannot. Rates are rates and they should be industry standard at the very least regardless of how many pilot would be at the 5 year captain pay rate. We don't choose the fleet nor can control pilot age/retirement demographics which are the driving factors in upgrade time.

But if I was going to make the case, it would be that our previous contracts banded all of our WBs to everyone else's top paying aircraft. That's why our WB pay rate has been about the same as everyone else's 777 even though those other airlines had lower pay rates for their 767s and A300. So why does management get to make the convinient argument that it should be different now? In reality, we've had three pay rates: WB + BKO (777,MD11), WB (767,A300), & NB (757,737). If there was going to be a change (other than maybe a single blended rate ala IPA), it would be to band the 757 to our WB rate just like industry standard, WB rate meaning everyone else's top paying aircraft, just as in the past.

Industry standard also includes profit sharing of 10% pre-tax up to $2.5B and 20% pre-tax above $2.5B, and cash over cash, and 8 holiday pay days, and retro of 4/4/14/first pay raise, and snap up provisions, and training pay of 5 hours a day, and full B fund contributions during LTD, and no cap on LTD, and no offsets on LTD, and 1:3.5 duty rig, and hotels during CQ and sub, and scope that protects extraterritorial flying and belly freight assurances. That doesn't include reserve rules and I can keep going on other items as well. How much far behind do we have to get before you stop using the PBS excuse? The fact we are line bidding is one of about three things we may be ahead on.

I have already covered this in this thread. The reason why we don't have a seperate 777 payrate is because the company's argument in 2015 was that "we are already paying our MD11/767/A300/777 pilots more than what DL pays their 777 pilots, we're not going to give the 777 guys even more."

To allow the company to now pay our 767/A300 guys less than industry leading widebody pay would be giving up that position that we successfully held in previous contracts.

Wht did you cherry pick everyones contract? Delta get 4:15 per training day. Jury is out on the retro pay raise. Belly freight and extraterritorial flying is all smoke and mirrors by other carriers, they are doing the same thing we are. I have had multiple times when a UPS can was loaded onto my flight. Snap up looks good, how about when they start to snap down. Got to make a profit to share it.

Delta training day is now 5:00 / day for recurrent.

Its 3:05 per day during a full course, including over days off, for a total of 90 something hours (trainings lasts about a month.

just asked a delta friend just told me it was 4:15 did it just go up with the contract or on jan1?

Yes it’s from the new contract, and Jan 2024. Increased rates at DOS for 4:15 through 2023. 5:00 after 1/1/2024.

I didn't cherry pick anything. Everything I wrote is industry STANDARD, not industry leading. Meaning that AA, DA, and UA all have those things. And that includes Delta's training pay which is now 5 hours a day. For what we do, we should be industry LEADING and I should be cherry picking those items. But I thought listing industry standard items woulb be an easier sell to you and others that always seem to take the other side's side.

As for scope, IPA has language in their contract that protects extraterritorial flying. Even the IBT has this at Atlas! The IPA also tracks belly freight so that if it gets to a certain volume, it gets moved by UPS aircraft. I think even 2 pilot cockpit is standard now as well. And I also forgot about medical privacy/freedom.

Why are you even argueing against what we should get even if all of that was industry leading? Are you not a pilot here that wants these things? Keep in mind that out of all those items we are below standard only pay rates, retro and medical privacy will be part of the next TA. We have to live with the new contract for another 4+ years unless they make the duration more than the industry standard 4 years.

Again, ALL the items I listed are standard that AA, DA, UA have. The scope items I mentioned are also industry standard. Nothing I mentioned are industry leading items.

Edit, just read your other posts about delta training pay. Please go look at UALPA's latest contract comparison. It shows everything I just mentioned. Please educate yourself on how far below standard we are. Like I said, not having pbs may be only one of about three items were we lead. Everything else is below standard or barely standard.

We are behind on these things partly because we are operating on a contract that is over eight years old. Hopefully we learned that a six year contract plus the usual company dragging their feet for two years is not the way to go. Yes we need to inprove on a lot of items. Dragging out getting a new contract will put us even futher behind. A lot of these items we were ahead until last year.

FXLAX gets it.

This place is the official airline of Stockholm Syndrome (actually scratch that - I'm sure ASL is flying Stockholm). Company shills are all around us.

max8222, please show me the contracts with "snap down". You really don't understand what's happening around you.

I am well aware of what is happening around me. Since you probably were not around a snap down is when the airlines go bankrupt and gut the contracts. I forgot this is the new deal and it can never happen again. Guess I was a sleep during COVID when the pax carriers should have gone bankrupt if they didn't get bailed out. Huge reason for the leverage and pilot shortage they have now is because the airlines used the government COVID money to offer early retirements to save money and prevent layoffs.

The only thing that FXLAX gets is the envy he has of his pax friends. He should join them since he gets it.

.

this is dumbest thing we will read today. just another company lackey with Stockholm Syndrome.

It's become increasingly obvious that you are unaware of how this industry works today and you are comparing it to the industry of 20+ years ago which no longer exists.

I think it's time we all put your anti-pilot, pro-company posts on our ignore list.

Please put me on your ingnore list. This way you can Go on believing your fairy tale stories of things you are uneducated about. We will see how far you pink pony wished get you.

My initial point to you was, why are you throwing out the "pbs is industry standard" argument RIGHT NOW when there are countiless industry standard items we don't have. Why argue against what we should have? You are even admiting now that I pointed it out that we are behind. So why the pbs argument? Just doesn't make sense to me unless you are some kind of contract pacifist.

Anyway, many of the items I listed have been industry standard: profit sharing, cash over cap, holiday pay, snap up provisions, 3.5 duty rig, hotels during cq and sub, even the scope protections I mentioned. The other items, maybe one or two of the three legacies didn't have. That means that one or two did have those items since before this industry negotiating cycle. For what we do, we should be one of those airlines that has those items and others pattern bargain off of us. But we wont ever get to that point unless people like you stop throwing out the old tired, we don't have pbs, argument EVERY time somone tries to make a point why we should be industry leading, much less industry standard.

There seeems to be a culture change happening where the bottom of the seniority list feel more like I do than how you do. I'll I ask is not to get in the way of those of us who are trying to be a strong unified pilot group who wants to fight for more than what we have becuase we deserve better than what other pilot groups have fought for in their contract gains.

Its more embarrasment that we have pilots here that argue for mediocrity. I dont want what other passenger airlines have. I want THIS airline to have BETTER than what passenger airlines have. We have a good system form that provides mostly what most pilots like. Now I'd like to see us go towards being industry leading at some point in the next couple of contract cycles. I'll do my best and my part to help us get there. Its my goal but at least its not to toil in the mid to lower teir pilot contracts.

Pax carriers will never layoff agian, right. Seems like you have no idea of what the industry is like.

FXLAX posted "I dont want what other passenger airlines have. I want THIS airline to have BETTER than what passenger airlines have. We have a good system form that provides mostly what most pilots like. Now I'd like to see us go towards being industry leading at some point in the next couple of contract cycles. I'll do my best and my part to help us get there. Its my goal but at least its not to toil in the mid to lower teir pilot contracts."

I thoroughly agree with this. I used PBS as one large item that we do not want, I could have added things such as their vacation which is way worse than ours. I used one instance why we do not want to preach industry standard. We want what is best for Fedex pilots and how we operate. Of course other airlines provide metrics and we should not ignore what they have.

In the past when we were way ahead the company wanted to compare us to the majors, of course they only want to compare when we are ahead. Now that we are behind they say we are different and you can't compare. I know who the enemy is. I might have been here a long time but I know who pays me and also sees me as a cost center where they will try and save money.

You really are clueless. I was at my first major in the '90s.

Unlike you, I have worked at multiple passenger airlines (LCC and legacy) prior to FX.

FXLAX has it right. You clearly seem not to want to acknowledge the realities of working here.

Yes, I acknowledged that we have about three things we are arguably ahead on. But that's why I listed a whole bunch of things we are way behind on. So if you are going to say in essence, we cant ask for that because pbs or any other list of things, I come back with the list of things we are not industry standard, let alone leading. So again, my only point is, don't throw that pbs bull out when there are more things we are behind on than ahead on. Don't argue on behalf of what management says, they don't need the help. This is the time we need to be unified and not show any weaknesses. If you trully feel that we cant ask for something becuase pbs, then please just don't say it at all. Let those who are trying to be unifed and strong take the lead. Having pilots argue against the collective pilots' interest only weakens us at the table.

We aren't going to get everything this time around. I mean, we are only negotaiting a few things on TA2. But we need to start somewhere. Maybe in a couple of contract cycles we will be back on top and managment will change their tune again on who to compare us to.

You think I want to give up things for the company, you have read into all of that. I never said to give up a thing. I mostly say we need to get what is best for us and to stop parrotting industry standard. I want us to be unified because that is the only way we will get the contract that we want. In fighting.especially between jubior and senior will get us nothiing but a crap contract.

I have friends at all of the majors so I talk with them all the time. So I do not have my head in the sand on what is occuring outside of Fedex.

Then stop throwing out the bs PBS argument out there. And tell all your fedex pilot friends not to do it either. When pilots stop arguing against our own position, then we will be unifed.

PS, your delta freind was wrong. Please use the contract comparisons so you actually know what industry standard is currently. At this point, I'd be content with industry standard and a few industry leading items (line bidding, vacation, retirement). I hope one day itll be industry leading with a few industry standard items.

I believe that we have turned PBS aginst ourselves and make it appear far more valuable than it is. Our schedule is far more driven by system form than any of the pax carriers.

I'm not saying this to advocate for PBS. For one it would be disastrous to our vacation policy. I just don't think it holds the massive value to the company that we give it credit for. It has a much more limited utility here.

They have an airsoft held to our head and we treat it like a .45

Agree with this assessment.

I use PBS as a quick example and the two of you run off on a tangent like I said I would trade your new born to keep PBS.

My friend is on the LEC at Delta and spent man hours duing their TA talking to pilots in their crew room and on the phone about the contract. So I assumed he was a good source.

Not at FedEx, but curious about this line of thinking. Of course pax could furlough again. Anybody could furlough. But, the reality is the industry is different than the one you watched throughout your career. Consolidation has led to far fewer carriers, leading them to be much more likely to be too big to fail. During COVID, they didn’t receive one bailout, but THREE rounds of bailout money. Nobody was furloughed despite plans to furlough. I don’t think the legacies furloughed much (if at all) during the 2008 crisis. So that would make the last round of real furloughs to be 20+ years ago after 9/11. Just heavy stagnation. Profits since 2014 have been unlike anything in the first 90 years of the pax airlines.

Yes, they are more sensitive to the economy and they can furlough, but the notion that furloughs will occur at any hiccup is an old line of thinking. They are more resilient and consolidation has led to a different paradigm.

They got bailed out because of COVID, not because they are to big to fail. Looking at their explosive growth right now and how they are trying to capture market share, thee will be winners and losers. With the highly leveraged aircraft purchase a big slow down and you will see cut backs real fast.

They got bailed out because they were too big to fail. They weren’t bailed out after 9/11 because they were not too big to fail. 4 carriers have 80% of the market share. It never used to be like that.

The other factor is retirements. There has never been a retirement wave like this one. And it will blunt staffing overages for a while to come. There was no such shock absorber in previous crises.

I ask again, how long as it been since the big 3 furloughed?

Actually, highly leveraged aircraft purchases bring the interests of aircraft finance markets and Boeing to the "too big to fail" table as well - making it even less likely that the government would sit on its hands.

Good point.