Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Cargo > FedEx
MEC Vote 10-4 to approve-Similar to DAL MEC >

MEC Vote 10-4 to approve-Similar to DAL MEC

Search
Notices

MEC Vote 10-4 to approve-Similar to DAL MEC

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-28-2015, 11:02 AM
  #21  
Line Holder
 
Knots2U's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2014
Posts: 64
Default

Originally Posted by Busdrivr View Post
The SLAB explanation did't even explain what a SLAB is.

Company SLB of up to $110,000 at retirement. Applies to all pilots

Anyone, anyone,........ Bueller?
I have no idea what this is. Any ideas out there?
Knots2U is offline  
Old 08-28-2015, 11:07 AM
  #22  
Organizational Learning 
 
TonyC's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: Directly behind the combiner
Posts: 4,948
Default

Originally Posted by fr8av8r View Post

Also, the math is incomplete on example #1 . The "word problem" say "50% of the eligible earnings... " The example stops short of completing the "50%" part of the equation. 50% of $175,552 is $87,776. So the retiring pilot in the example will get the lesser of50% of his/her DSA ($98,098 in the example), or 50% of the "eligible earnings" ($87,776).

Attention to detail is really overrated, especially when it comes to contract language.

If you look closely, you'll see the math example begins with a pay computation for 2 years:

Pay: $286,000 x 1000 CH x 2 =


That means the pay rate is $286,000 per CH, right?

Is it too late to change my vote to YES?



Also, the Section Highlights shows this benefit as
"Company SLB of up to $110,000 at retirement."
They could have used $1,000,000 instead of $110,000 as long as it's computed as the "lesser of". With a maxed out DSA account and a $286/CH pay rate, it cannot be more than $98,098.

But since there is a $110,000 limit, increased pay rates will result in an erosion of this benefit. An eligible pilot in DOS+4 will see a reduction in the benefit to only 49% of his DSA, and a pilot retiring a year later would only receive 48%.

I never cease to be amazed by their pettiness.



(And it's sad that I couldn't trust the math on the given example, but had to break out my own calculator.)





.
TonyC is offline  
Old 08-28-2015, 11:07 AM
  #23  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 177
Default

Originally Posted by Boola Boola View Post
All that work for this? Meh...
Pay rates are weak, no A fund improvement, minute B fund improvement, minor extra pay improvements. Underwhelming.
+1

Surprised the MEC agreed to send this POS out for ratification. I can only guess that they are testing our resolve to see how bad we really want the contract that we deserve. If it is voted down, they will know we are unified and serious about our expectations, and so will the company...I'm ready to move to the next stage.
Some guy is offline  
Old 08-28-2015, 11:09 AM
  #24  
Organizational Learning 
 
TonyC's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: Directly behind the combiner
Posts: 4,948
Default

Originally Posted by Knots2U View Post
Company SLB of up to $110,000 at retirement. Applies to all pilots

Anyone, anyone,........ Bueller?
I have no idea what this is. Any ideas out there?
Go back to this post and click on the attached document. (Click on the blue square with the white arrow next to fr8av8r's name.)

Originally Posted by fr8av8r View Post

Retirement SLB implementation...






.
TonyC is offline  
Old 08-28-2015, 11:11 AM
  #25  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Underdog's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Discombobulated
Posts: 155
Default

Originally Posted by Some guy View Post
+1

Surprised the MEC agreed to send this POS out for ratification. I can only guess that they are testing our resolve to see how bad we really want the contract that we deserve. If it is voted down, they will know we are unified and serious about our expectations, and so will the company...I'm ready to move to the next stage.
.....agree wholeheartedly
Underdog is offline  
Old 08-28-2015, 11:13 AM
  #26  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,224
Default

Count one for "no"...
golfandfly is offline  
Old 08-28-2015, 11:23 AM
  #27  
Gets Weekends Off
 
155mm's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2014
Posts: 454
Default

Originally Posted by TonyC View Post
Attention to detail is really overrated, especially when it comes to contract language.

If you look closely, you'll see the math example begins with a pay computation for 2 years:

Pay: $286,000 x 1000 CH x 2 =


That means the pay rate is $286,000 per CH, right?

Is it too late to change my vote to YES?



[/COLOR]
CHART: Here Is What The Highest-Paid Athletes Make Per Game - Business Insider
155mm is offline  
Old 08-28-2015, 11:35 AM
  #28  
Gets Weekends Off
 
MaydayMark's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: MD-11 Captain
Posts: 4,304
Default


155,

I must be missing your point? What kind of Professional Athlete are you? Your "Public Profile" doesn't say?


MaydayMark is offline  
Old 08-28-2015, 11:36 AM
  #29  
Gets Weekends Off
 
The Walrus's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2010
Position: Socket Drawer
Posts: 1,797
Default

Originally Posted by MaydayMark View Post
155,

I must be missing your point? What kind of Professional Athlete are you?


Underpaid obviously.
The Walrus is offline  
Old 08-28-2015, 12:50 PM
  #30  
"blue collar thug"!
 
iarapilot's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: A proponent of...
Posts: 1,614
Default

It is a no for me. All I needed to see to make that decision is the pay increase and lack of retirement improvements. Fairly insulting.

New hire pay to $4000. Good for the new hires. And min $100/hr for FDA

Some of the Sec4 critical period stuff looks better.

Sec 7 Concerning vacation when awarded a VTO will be interesting to read. Now, If you bid 2, 3, 4 weeks of vacation in a month and are awarded a VTO, you get paid for all vacation days. Hopefully they didnt take that away.

Sec 8 Deviation bank looks better
Hotel cancellation bank is nice, but not much money

Sec 9 Passover pay changed, for the worse it seems; but I dont really understand it.

Sec 25 Established a 6 week bid period. I will have to look at the TA to see if we can be screwed by that.

Sec 26 No harm JS for all bases. Thats good

FDA Many improvements...which should have been in place originally.

Looks like the DSA payout screws guys that waited to retire hoping the contract would be better for them. Pathetic.

No obvious change to accepted fares-unsat

We did a bridge contract and allowed the CGN FDA stuff, which was a mistake. We cant keep up with inflation on the pay, after 6 years of negotiating and same goes for retirement.

I know that our NC put in a lot of effort on this, but after all this time we only received modest gains. And I cant wait to read the TA and see the legalese that has to be interpreted.


And, a 10-4 vote for. That tells us something too.
iarapilot is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
newKnow
Delta
80
08-23-2015 11:10 PM
TheManager
Major
9584
07-28-2015 12:15 PM
gzsg
Delta
10296
07-10-2015 01:42 PM
Superdad
Major
19
05-26-2012 06:24 PM
RockBottom
Major
0
01-07-2006 03:24 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices