FDX-Fruitful Week?

Reply Subscribe

Page 17 of 25

« First

Last »

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

08-18-2015, 05:47 PM

#161

FDXLAG

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Nov 2006

Position: 767 FO

Posts: 8,047

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyC

What have I missed?

It would be interesting to know what the average retiree gives back in sick/disability to Fred when he retires. I'll bet a lot of guys give up the whole enchilada and just as many zero. Probably either or not a bunch in between.

08-18-2015, 06:52 PM

#162

HIFLYR

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Sep 2007

Position: 777 Captain in Training

Posts: 1,457

Quote:

Originally Posted by MD11HOG

I'm sorry that you inferred that I wanted a strike. I was asking if you would scab if a lawful strike was called here since you said" I would be in favor of everything short of strike". I don't know if you will support something you're not in favor of. It's a tough call for some. Do you realize the company's freedom in self help also? Last time we tried work to the rule during self help it was easily countered with 200% draft for a divided crew force.

Hopefully if it comes to that we are more unified. You really beting on guys who will go for 200% will go on strike?

08-18-2015, 07:04 PM

#163

Jetjok

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Sep 2006

Position: Retired

Posts: 3,717

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaydayMark

Jetjok, Jetjok, Jetjok ...

As usual, you are absolutely correct. We should give YET ANOTHER good deal to just the senior guys! I might benefit myself! I don't know what I was thinking!*?

I got mine ... pull up the ladder!

Mark, just exactly where did you glean your above statement from my earlier comment of: "This thread has really degraded quickly, thanks in large part to Mayday Mark and a few others. The past is the past. This upcoming contract is NOT the previous contract. " How do you read this and come up with the idea that I'm suggesting "we should give yet another good deal to just the senior guys" or for that matter, to anyone???

What I said was that you and a few others here continue to post divisive comments, at a time when unity is what's called for. To make matters worse, you, like myself, are not a player in this drawn-out drama, so why not hush up and sit back and watch the show.

08-18-2015, 07:20 PM

#164

pipe

Banned

Joined APC: Mar 2009

Position: 757 Capt

Posts: 798

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nightflyer

ALPA is supposed to represent all members of the seniority list equally.

If they don't include the 25k payment in this contract, then they will have not represented me equally. What about that is so hard for you to understand?

They said they got the FE's back in the front seat because "it was the right thing to do".

I say giving everyone the 25K that some got in the last contract is the "right thing to do".

Why is that so hard to understand?

The company wants to give the new hires a different retirement account. Why should I care? Because it will lead to this exact type of division within the seniority list.

If you are in favor of giving a special bonus or special deal to those that retire under this contract, are you also in favor or screwing the new hires out of our retirement plan?

So, you asked me if someone else got a better deal than I did, would I vote no? The answer is heck yes. I am not about to vote in favor of screwing myself.

Self help is another matter. I would prefer not to be in self help, and if we do go to self help, I would be in favor of everything short of strike. I don't think a strike is a good idea for many reasons, and I think we can get what we deserve by working to the rule.

Upon further review, I would like ALPA to disproportionately represent a portion of the pilot group in this contract. It's high time that we demand a fix for the travesty that is probation pay.

Pipe

08-18-2015, 08:12 PM

#165

Laughing_Jakal

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Sep 2006

Posts: 1,336

Idle hands and minds truly are the devil's workshop. TonyC's idea is pretty good...but it doesn't matter until next contract. I don't give a rip about all your little pet peeves. Y'all sound like you're conjecturing on a will and already arguing about what you may or not be left by a dead uncle. No wonder the company thinks they can have you cheap. As you were. My negotiating committee speaks for me! I'll like what they say I'll like and they asked me my opinion...and to help them work on my behalf i will support them....period.

08-18-2015, 08:15 PM

#166

FXDX

Proponent of Hysteria

Joined APC: Mar 2005

Position: 3B

Posts: 1,052

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jetjok

This thread has really degraded quickly, thanks in large part to Mayday Mark and a few others. The past is the past. This upcoming contract is NOT the previous contract. You clowns need to maintain your resolve and your esprit de corps, while keeping your eye on the ball and when a TA is produced, read it, understand it, then vote on it.

Mark, aren't you out on LTD, never to return? If so, perhaps it's time to back away from drudging up the past, as the fact is that you didn't make out so badly.

Nightflyer, you say:

But since there are guys on property that had received that $25K windfall, way back when, wouldn't it be wrong to give them another $25K? I mean, they'd still be $25K ahead of you. Now how fair would that be

Seriously, you guys need to remain united and shout down those who are trying to fracture your unity.

Seriously, you are the kettle calling the pot black. You tell Mark to go away, at least he is still on the seniority list. How long have you been retired yet are still lecturing us on our contract?

Your quote above is where someone might get the idea you want to give the older guys another $25K. Thats not what was suggested by Nightflyer that would cause him to vote no. He means, and you probably know this but are acting obtuse, that everybody ought to get $25K when they turn 53, just like the guys who did in the 2006 contract. Nobody who already got it would get another, but those of us who didn't would when we turned that age. Simple enough for you?

08-19-2015, 03:44 PM

#167

Flybywyr

Line Holder

Joined APC: Jun 2014

Position: 767 Captain

Posts: 52

MEC Chairman Message 19AUG15

After a briefing from the Negotiating Committee earlier today, the MEC passed the following resolution concerning contract negotiations:

Whereas, the MEC has received a full briefing concerning a mediation framework designed to lead to a tentative agreement,

Whereas, the MEC has fully considered the merits of turning the mediation framework into a tentative agreement,

Whereas, the MEC believes that the mediation framework represents an agreement in principle,

Therefore be it resolved that the MEC instructs the Negotiating Committee to complete language related to the mediation framework so that the MEC may review it as a tentative agreement.

08-19-2015, 03:46 PM

#168

Nightflyer

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Mar 2006

Position: Crewmember

Posts: 1,381

As I asked in the other thread, can someone explain what this means?

Does that mean we are entering into mediation?

Or do we have a "verbal agreement" that needs to be converted into legal language?

Can someone explain what this means?

08-19-2015, 03:53 PM

#169

busdriver12

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Nov 2013

Posts: 2,756

Apparently whomever writes these resolutions and passes them on to us doesn't fly very often.

We are pilots, not lawyers. We are trained to not, "hint and hope."

We understand clear freaking English. Or maybe I'm just speaking for myself, but a little clarification is requested.

08-19-2015, 03:55 PM

#170

Bill Kilgore

Line Holder

Joined APC: Apr 2012

Position: Huey Gunship

Posts: 64

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nightflyer

Sounds to me like the framework the NC has been working out with FDX in mediation represents an "agreement in principle" and needs to be converted into a form that represents an actual TA so the MEC can review it.

But hell I'm not a lawyer and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night either. Pretty sure it's not bad news though.