The NC stays … for now!
12-31-2023, 07:53 AM
#61
Aspiring PSA Captain
Joined APC: Sep 2020
Posts: 831
Originally Posted by Bill80
Our airline is not doing well right now. That is the current reality. The earnings call and 10Q shows that. Both are publicly available information. You can call me clueless because facts don't agree with your version of reality, but it doesn't seem like you know what you're talking about.
It doesn't mean the current situation will last. The industry is cyclical.
It doesn't mean the current situation will last. The industry is cyclical.
Does FedEx extend lower rates when a business advises them that their industry is having a tough time? Doubt it.
12-31-2023, 08:50 AM
#62
Line Holder
Joined APC: Nov 2023
Posts: 70
Originally Posted by Bill80
Thank you for being respectful. I'm not trying to divide or settle. I voted against the TA. I'm trying to be realistic.
None of the airlines you are comparing had a pension, nor tried to increase it. To think that doubling the pension while achieving all the other desired gains is in the realm of possible is ridiculous. It's like Dr. Evil going back in time to 1969 and demanding a ransom of $100 billion dollars and everyone in the Oval office starts laughing at the absurdity of the request.
There's no reason we don't deserve an industry leading contract. But wasting further time trying to increase the pension will prove a fool's errand and cost us time and money. Which by the way, increases economic risk and uncertainty. How long do you think the pax airlines new contracts will be viable at any airline other than Delta (the only one that's managed decently) if demand starts dropping off? This has played out before.
None of the airlines you are comparing had a pension, nor tried to increase it. To think that doubling the pension while achieving all the other desired gains is in the realm of possible is ridiculous. It's like Dr. Evil going back in time to 1969 and demanding a ransom of $100 billion dollars and everyone in the Oval office starts laughing at the absurdity of the request.
There's no reason we don't deserve an industry leading contract. But wasting further time trying to increase the pension will prove a fool's errand and cost us time and money. Which by the way, increases economic risk and uncertainty. How long do you think the pax airlines new contracts will be viable at any airline other than Delta (the only one that's managed decently) if demand starts dropping off? This has played out before.
"But wasting further time trying to increase the pension will prove a fool's errand and cost us time and money."
Couldn't agree more. Let's $h!tcan the whole a-plan increase push, ax the QOL gives, give us market rates, max out DC and COC, and lets be done.
12-31-2023, 09:04 AM
#63
Line Holder
Joined APC: Nov 2023
Posts: 70
Originally Posted by Bill80
The problem was that most of the value was in retirement. We accepted low pay rates and QOL concessions to justify the retirement increase.
Our negotiating focus was increasing the pension. This resulted in a subpar TA1 once the other airlines got their payday, with most of their value added in pay rates, not retirement.
Our negotiating focus was increasing the pension. This resulted in a subpar TA1 once the other airlines got their payday, with most of their value added in pay rates, not retirement.
Originally Posted by Bill80
If you're obssessed with the costs, when you compare contracts, make sure you subtract the efficiency gains at Delta and other pax airlines by them having PBS and losing their pension. It's easy to only add value in their contracts since they already gave up the two biggest inefficiencies at their company.
Fair point. On the other side, the company said that the savings from sunsetting of the a-plan in TA1 was 10-15 years out and thus couldn't add to this contract. I don't know what it's worth, but it AIN'T $0!
12-31-2023, 09:26 AM
#64
Aspiring PSA Captain
Joined APC: Sep 2020
Posts: 831
Originally Posted by FedUpWilson318
"But wasting further time trying to increase the pension will prove a fool's errand and cost us time and money."
Couldn't agree more. Let's $h!tcan the whole a-plan increase push, ax the QOL gives, give us market rates, max out DC and COC, and lets be done.
Couldn't agree more. Let's $h!tcan the whole a-plan increase push, ax the QOL gives, give us market rates, max out DC and COC, and lets be done.
I'll bet that 80% or more would concur with this approach.
12-31-2023, 10:09 AM
#65
Line Holder
Joined APC: Dec 2017
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by Merle Haggard
I think this has been the position of the vast majority for YEARS. Every survey has thoroughly prevented anyone from communicating this because it was not what "they" wanted.
I'll bet that 80% or more would concur with this approach.
I'll bet that 80% or more would concur with this approach.
It's not a fair argument either for people to say you should have gotten more in pension 2015 or before, because people that are saying that are armchair quarterbacking. If you have an industry leading retirement in 2005 or whenever... it's tough to bargain and say it's not enough... so you focus other places. To look back now after 9/11.. or housing/financial or covid crises...when many thought life as we know it is changing.. we did our best with the info we had. If you are a parent, 20yrs from now you will regret something about how you raised your kids. Maybe some of you came here during covid because you thought pax was done.. things change and show some grace that hindsight is 20/20. Even though business is slow now, the pilot market is great and we need a market contract.
We can get improvement for all... or we can vote it down again.
edit***** literally years ago I remember legacy airlines thanking us for holding the line on payrates while legacies were suffering bankruptcies and concessions. the company wanted to sh*tcan our pension because all the legacies did... we were fighting to keep anything because for yrs we wanted delta + a nickel.. when delta was in the sh*tter, the company was like.. ok, you want to be like delta now?? It's cyclic .. we bargained to hold the line and the legacies are happy we did now.
Last edited by willflyforfud; 12-31-2023 at 10:32 AM.
12-31-2023, 10:36 AM
#66
Line Holder
Joined APC: Dec 2023
Posts: 41
Originally Posted by FedUpWilson318
FWIW I don't think you are hurting us as a group. I do think the perspective that FedEx is down in the last few months so we must accept a sub-par contract is wrong.
01-02-2024, 05:28 PM
#67
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2018
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 153
Originally Posted by Bill80
To be clear, I've never said let's accept a subpar contract. I'm all for an industry leading contract. I think that can be accomplished without waiting 2 years trying to double the pension along with all the other things that need cleaning up from TA1.
01-02-2024, 06:41 PM
#68
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 599
You don't know what you are talking about. Another JF cry baby who can't get along with others. Looks like you have only been at Fedex a few years, what have you earned the right to? Ma because you aren't getting drop for draft every month like you did during COVID and can't pay the mortgage?
01-02-2024, 06:56 PM
#69
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2018
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 153
Originally Posted by max8222
You don't know what you are talking about. Another JF cry baby who can't get along with others. Looks like you have only been at Fedex a few years, what have you earned the right to? Ma because you aren't getting drop for draft every month like you did during COVID and can't pay the mortgage?
01-02-2024, 08:22 PM
#70
On Reserve
Joined APC: Dec 2023
Posts: 18
Originally Posted by BlueAvi8tor
The SM group is FULL of folks who will absolutely accept a crap TA as long as they get theirs. They are beyond plssed that TA1 got voted down because of what they "earned" retirement-wise.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
