Let's Talk Fedex 757 Pay Rates...
 

While the Holiday Season focus has been the latest poltical games inside our own MEC & NC, the final piece of the "Industry Standard Payrates" was published with the new SWA TA....and their associated 64 page SWAPA Contract Comparison.

If you haven't read it yet, get a copy of the pdf. Focus on pages 15-21, which discuss Aircraft Grouping - Wide Body (WB), Large Narrowbody (LNB) and Small Narrow Body (SNB), Important Notes re: each airline, Fleet Data, and finally - black & white, straight forward Industry Hourly Rates.

(Note: SWA pilots pay is based on TFPs. To convert 1 TFP to 1 Hour of Pay you must multiply by 1.149. The SWA new TFP rates have been converted to hourly rates in these charts to allow direct comparison)

(Note: Unfortunately, in our 2006 CBA negotitations we agreed that whichever aircraft replaced the 727 --- the 737 or the 757 -- either aircraft would be paid at 727/737 rates. We were the first and only airline to agree to pay band the 757 with those smaller/less capable narrow body aircraft).

Here are the new 2024 Industry Hourly Rates for Large-Narrow Body aircraft.

Top-of-Scale Captain:
Fedex (failed TA 1.0 - Feb '24) - $339.64

American (A321neo/XLR) - $374.36
Delta (757) - $374.36
United (757) - $374.36

Southwest (737) - $364.52

Alaska (737) - $340.25
Hawaiian (A321neo) - $329
Jet Blue (A321neo/737) - $330
Spirit (A321neo/737) - $306

Top of Scale - First Officer:
Fedex (failed TA 1.0 - Feb '24) - $245.75

American (A321neo/XLR) - $255.69
Delta (757) - $255.69
United (757) - $255.69

Southwest (737) - $255.17

Alaska (737) - $235.21
Hawaiian (A321neo) - $229.64
Jet Blue (A321neo/737) - $228.13
Spirit (A321neo/737) - $197.97

Under TA 1.0 our 757 Capt's would be paid 9.3% below all 3 legacy airline rates, and 7% below SWA 737 rates.

Under TA 1.0 our 757 FOs would be paid 4% below legacy rates, and 3.7% below SWA 737 rates.

Is this acceptable?

While TA1.0 properly addressed, and begins to correct, the current Fedex 15 year pay scale vs standard airline 12 year pay scale, it did not focus on or address the fact we continue to accept 757 pay rates BELOW Industry Standard, and now even below SWA 737s.

Please discuss.

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

p.s. Remember, under the MBCB Plan the "High 5" concept is DEAD! Remember the new mantra - Every Year Counts! Ok, then let's make sure every year and every jet is paid at true Industry Standard Rates!

I think it's well known at this point that TA1 pay rates missed the mark. 14% DOS was unacceptale. 25% should have been the target.

Now it will have to be even higher because we were due 22% compounding in January 2025. Sure would be disappointing if we wait 1.5 years for a TA that has 3% more pay rates than what we would have at that point under TA1.

If the block reps that want to replace the NC get their way, 1.5 years would be optimistic.

The time to change the NC is passed. That ship sailed

First it was the threat of 2-3 years for a new TA if we voted no…that turned out to be blatantly false with the company signaling they want a quick deal.

Now the threat has morphed into a 2+ year delay if we replace the key personnel that crafted the doomed TA1. Same people making the same speculative, empty threats in an attempt to get others to fall in line with the old guard.

United replaced their NC and had a better deal in under a year. PM’s buddies have wasted 4-5 months so far hanging on to him in vain. I’d gladly tack on 5 months onto our current timeline to get more competent people on the NC.

Great post! Just to add on, don’t forget JetBlue has a $13/hr redeye override pay. So, that would put their ToS CA pay above ours.

So much for our openers of industry leading pay rates!

As part of the discussion, I think it needs to be pointed out that we have two pay categories, widebody and narrowbody. Matching pay rates to specific aircraft may not be ideal for all. Is that where we want to go?

UPS has the highest career earnings of any airline, even after the large contracts of the big three. How can that be if their highest pay rate as of January 1 will be almost $70 per hour less? Maybe it is because they have a single pay rate, so they get paid more for longer rather than a lot at the very end. Even with their contract extensions, UPS didn't exceed Delta's 2016 contract highest pay rate until September of 2023.

So everyone on the Airbus and 767 should get less than what was in the failed TA? Be careful when you demand Industry Standard, you just may get what you ask for.

[QUOTE=CactusMan;3742889]First it was the threat of 2-3 years for a new TA if we voted no…that turned out to be blatantly false with the company signaling they want a quick deal.

Company never said they wanted a quick deal, its to their benefit to delay.

This guy, under one of his many usernames, once again advocates for lesser pay rates because of the fleet makeup. Sounds like management.

Company hasn’t said a word, but several reps have indicated via email and voice comms that the company wants a deal.

IF your claim that they are in fact dragging it out is true, then it costs us nothing to finally get rid of PM.

these voice comms and emails are speculation at best as to why they believe the company wants a deal. of course the company wants a deal, a great one for them, and another concessionary one for us!

The company is spreading rumours that they want a quick deal because their dealmaker is still our NC chair. Remove him and see if they still want a quick deal. Guess its too late now. PM will be driving the ship again. Full steam ahead, again, without a single survey to figure out what the pilots really want, again.

But, but, they promised us real, in depth, black and white surveys where they would know what we want, didn't they?

The MEC going back on their words? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.

PM is going to negotiate what he wants, not what we want. Count on it.

Giving him until May is more wasted time if he can't come up with a deal that will pass the crew force. If he does, I predict it will be a 51% deal and we will be the laughing stock of the industry, again.

If he can't make a deal that will pass, we will have wasted almost an entire year, all because he wouldn't do the honorable thing, like he promised he would.

What a clown show. I am so disgusted.

From the MEC Chairman:

‘The political tactics from some of your block reps stating that we don’t have a strategy, a plan, or polling data to know what you want is completely untrue. It is political babble. We have post-rejected TA data from multiple surveys, focus meeting data, phone calls, and emails.’

In the past few months I’ve personally had a phone survey, did a pilot wide online survey, and signed up for a small focus group.

Anyone saying surveys haven’t been done and the MEC doesn’t know what the pilot group wants is either ill informed, or pushing a false narrative.

The problem is that all three of those were to determine WHY THE TA FAILED. That’s it.

The online survey had low participation. The phone survey and online survey were polling the exact same items. The phone survey at least had no confirmation bias, but absolute numbers were less than 1,000 participants. And the focus groups are at risk of bias confirmation because attendees obviously had something to say about TA shortcomings.

The surveys were designed to present a broad based 30,000 foot view of what went wrong:

Compensation
Retirement
Scope
QOL

They were designed to be retrospective to identify what the issues of the failed TA were to the NMB. That’s from the mouth of the union.

To assert that they are now forward looking is incorrect. How could they be? There was no precise focus on the issues. There were no specifics about scope. I wasn’t asked what QOL items I would like to see. There were no questions about what percentage of retirement is suitable or if cash over cap was a must. None of that. No specifics at all. Pay and compensation had a few specifics, but that’s it.

I’ve emailed my rep and we’re on the same page. But I’m one block of many. A survey is the most direct way of getting the sentiment to the NC. And quite frankly, they don’t seem to care.

I missed the part where they said no more surveys? I was told a scope and retirement survey were imminent. Has that changed?

Were you also told that we’ve already met with the NMB and will likely do so two more times in January before we even accomplish these surveys? Because we have.

The point is not to arbitrarily fill out surveys. It’s for the surveys to direct our path on negotiations.

The surveys likely won’t be completed until the middle of February. That’s more than half the allotted time to this negotiating committee.

I think PM should go, he said he would. Zero confidence in him.

Random Thought
 

Just so everyone knows, the minimum monthly guarantee at UPS is 75:00 for a 28 day period. With 13 of these 28 day periods, their annual guarantee is 975 hours. Their top 2024 pay rate is $388.38.

This gives an annual guarantee of $378,670. If you divide that by 884, that would give us a top rate of $428.36. Our TA top rate was $394 in 2024. That would’ve guaranteed us $348,296. The devil is in the details. (And for good measure, Delta has a $447 hourly rate with MMG of 65:00 for an annual guarantee of $364,752.)

I understand UPS is not industry leading in hourly rates of pay. But I just wanted to highlight how far behind our nearest peer we were last time.

Theres more to a TA than just straight dollar comparisions but everyone seems locked in on pay rates vs actual compensation. FedEX should just match DL or UA plus a dollar and they'll make their gains in work rules just like they always do.

What specific, actual compensation gains are you referring to in TA1 (the TA you were initially vehemently against and then, soon after, completely in favor of)?

I take it you've studied the SWA chart closely. It seems you are about to say the quiet part out loud. You've proferred an interesting question, but you (we) must ask ourselves the corollary question: So everyone on the 757 should get less than industry rates to protect our binary WB/NB pay scales?

It appears to me there are multiple solutions to ensure each of our jets get industry standard rates...or above. Which will we choose?

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

like the profit sharing we don't have?

Just to clarify some items here, UPS doesn't get that rate until September 1 2024. This year, our (Fedex) min guarantee is 901 hours.

So, in 2024, UPS min guarantee is approximately $372,000 and our pay rate would have to be about $413 per hour to match.

Now, looking at the yearly pay thread, you say you are a WB captain making 6th year pay. You also said your yearly BLG was 1022 and you sold back about 50 (40%) hours of vacation. As a junior captain who had RLG for 75% of the year, yoor BLG was 15.6% higher than min and your total compensation was 21.3% higher than min. You did that while only being away from home for about 6 days a month according to your post. So how would that compare to someone hired at UPS in 2018? According to the UPS forum, you would still be an FO, years away from holding captain.

Whose contract do we want? If we took UPS's contract, we would be making more than a Delta pilot, but wouldn't we be giving concessions such as deadheading on company aircraft? What about Delta's contract. Wouldn't we be accepting PBS?

Why are we fixated on the highest rate? Isn't total compensation what we are after? Your post shows that a captain at UPS is guaranteed more than a captain at United or Delta, yet they will make almost $70 per hour less. If this was presented in a road show, people would be screaming about the fuzzy math.

Well, what are those solutions? How do we keep the 767 and Airbus paying the same as the 777 and MD11 and get the 757 up to industry standard? What is industry standard for the 757, Delta rates, SWA rates, or UPS rates? Does the rest of the fleet get the same percentage increase as the 757?

While technically accurate that Delta’s line-holder minimum guarantee is 65 hours per month, other contractual mechanisms (TLV and ALV) means that the de facto monthly minimum is around 70 hours.

Let's Go Big to Small.

Does our union or Fedex want to go to a single pay scale model like UPS?
There are both benefits and downsides to this pay model.

Does SWA fly the 757?
Easy answer - No. And we should have never agreed to pay the 757 at 727/737 rates.

What's the industry standard for 757 pay?
Easy answer - specifically outlined in my original post.

Top-of-Scale Captain - Jan 2024:
American (A321neo/XLR) - $374.36
Delta (757) - $374.36
United (757) - $374.36


Top of Scale - First Officer - Jan 2024
American (A321neo/XLR) - $255.69
Delta (757) - $255.69
United (757) - $255.69

How do we keep 767 & Airbus paying the same as 777 & MD11?
Well, now that gets interesting. There's multiple questions and answers here.

Does the rest of the fleet get the same percentage increase as the 757?
Great question. But was that ever our goal, or just what we've done in the past?

Is it OK if the 757 guys get a slightly bigger, initial percentage increase vs 767/A300/777/MD11, if that's what it takes for everyone to be paid industry standard rates?
I'd argue Yes - absolutely. The WB jets would still get paid more. The 767/A300 could still be lumped in with othe others.

The problem was created in the 2006 contract when we traded mythical A380 rates for substandard 757 rates. Let's not kid ourselves, in Aug 2006 the company knew they were selecting the 757, not the 737. The 757 announcement came almost immediately after the CBA became effective on Nov 1, 2006.

Should that be rectified now? .....especially in the era of the MBCB Plan where "every year counts"?
The mentality, and promise of - "Dont worry about 757 pay, you'll retire off wide body pay" no longer holds true. High 5 will be gone for new hires. If "every year counts", then let's ensure that "every year" and "every aircraft and every seat" is paid at industry standard rates. One's retirement is based on it! Even more true, when you consider those early MBCB Plan contributions are the ones that will compound/grow the most, over the longest time period.

It is these type of changes, and details, which can make TA2.0 truly more equitable --- and is within the confines of the limited areas we are negotiating in the next 4 months.

You want TA2.0 to pass at greater than 70%? ....fix the underpayment of 757 rates now.

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

First, let's clear this up. I am not against the 757 paying the same rate that it pays at Delta. My questioning is more along the lines of the argument to get that rate. When we go into negotiations, we have to have justification for our asks. The company asks for that. The NMB asks for that. We ask the same of the company. So, as I cautioned, be careful what you ask for, ie, industry standard rates.

You keep saying that we should have industry standard pay rates. That is one of your justifications for 757 pay. Well, industry standard would make our 767's and Airbuses pay the same as the 757. Is that what you want? How do you convince the mediator that we deserve industry standard on the 757 when we agreed to classify that airframe as a NB in 2006, but say that we don't want that to apply to the 767 and Airbus. You said there are multiple solutions to solve this issue, yet haven't presented any solutions.

The other argument you make is that if we give up the A plan, then every dollar counts. I think that is a more solid argument, however, it requires giving up the A plan for all new hires. Is that what we want, an increased A plan for current pilots, and some other DC/MBCBP for all new hires in exchange for higher 757 rates?

If we get further down the road with the NMB, and get released, these are things we will have the present to the PEB. Things get more dicy after that.

Why not just make the single pay rate like we have here at UPS? One second order effect to this would be that folks waiting years for training slots would be pay protected, and maybe some would stay content flying the 757 (or its successor, probably another narrowbody).

Because a lot of people here think that will bring down all our rates. I’d argue it wouldn’t and would save the company quite a bit of money in training costs. More people would be willing to stay on it for the seniority bump if pay was the same. But, at the end of the day, the biggest problem is people who never plan on going to the 75 don’t care about those rates.

I say we forget the A plan bump this time. Use the extra money for pay rates and signing bonus. We can deal with the A plan later.

No, this type of thinking is exactly how we got here.

No more kicking the can down the road.

Fix the A plan, and come up with a solution for the younger guys that they like. It is possible to do both.

I’m pretty sure he was being sarcastic. Besides T&Co won’t let an AIP reach the MEC without an A plan bump.

Well…when negotiations began the number 1 priority, fixing retirement, was and still remains our priority. That retirement fix can come in several forms but most would agree that pay rates and signing bonus don’t address retirement in a long term meaningful way. Pay and signing bonus have to come up, but not addressing retirement would completely ignore what the majority of us want.

Thank you. This is the mentality we need.

You are sure this is true?

TA1 went all in on retirement and only got 43% of the vote. A TA that went all in on payrates, retro, and the B plan would get more than 43% of the vote. The demographics of the pilot group have changed since 2015.

Also, not sure about the other folks with 30ish years to go before I get forced out, but ever since our new leadership, DRIVE, blah blah blah I’m less than 100% sure that I’ll even be able to retire as a FedEx pilot. I’ve been here too long to just quit and go somewhere else. That fear is causing me to put way more emphasis on short term monetary gains and less concern about what happens in 2054 when I retire.

Amazon fulfillment centers are in almost all metropolitan areas now as a result of changes in consumer shopping habits. These centers provide "same day" deliveries & have completely upended the status quo that FEDEX & UPS had enjoyed for many decades. A collateral effect is that the value of vacant commercial land has skyrocketed nationwide.

That said, I'm having trouble reconciling employee indispensability irrespective of these changes.


HD

Yes - we want industry standard rates. Every aircraft. Every year. Decreasing our top rate at 15 years down to top rate at 12 years over the life of the contract was a smart addition by Fedex Mgmt. They did it to attract the younger pilots who are now facing stagnation. It's also good for us as it will allow direct comparison at top of scale in future contracts. Just because we agreed to something in 1998, 2006 and 2015, doesn't mean we can't ask for it to change in 2024.

The 757 is a NB aircraft. The 767 & A300 are not. They are clearly WB aircraft.

2024 Top of Scale Industry standard rates for each:

757 Capt (AA, DAL & UAL) - $374.36
757 FO (AA, DAL & UAL) - $255.69

767-300 (DAL & UAL) - $374.36
767-400 (DAL & UAL) - $447.24

A300 is not flown by any of the 3 big legacy carriers

I'm not an advocate of sunsetting the A plan, but it appears our NC and the company both are (...were).

My point, don't ask younger guys (future hires) to buy into sunsetting the A plan, and subsequent elimination of it's "High 5" benefit, and then continue to pay out the 757 at sub-standard, industry standard rates.

Pay each aircraft at their true, industry standard rate.

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

That seems pretty freaking straightforward. If the NC has to explain to me AGAIN why they can't do this then they can keep the next TA too.

Another concern is that industry standard rates will mean nada if guarantees are grossly depressed for half the contract. The NC needs to put the onus on management to "right-size" the crew force. They overhired (which was clear to every line pilot at the time) in order to feed at the covid trough. They need to use some of that windfall to retire their way to the desired force size. I am not interested in having contract gains completely offset by BLG losses. Maybe they should try to negotiate a two year no-furlough, no 4a2b/c clause or similar.

We fly the 767-300. Delta pays the same rate for the 767-300 as they do the 757. So, is the industry standard rate for the 767-300 the same as a 777 or a 757. The A300 is smaller than the 767-300. Industry standard would have it pay the same or less than the 767-300.

Again, be careful how you ask for things because you just might get them.