We Are Not Worth 1 %
09-08-2015, 02:48 PM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: Crewmember
Posts: 1,377
Originally Posted by Flyinhigh
You will never get an argument from me concerning what a FedEx Pilot is worth. My comment was in reference to your lack of factual information about the separation of the operating companies at FDX. A package sent via FedEx Ground will NEVER
touch any part of Express and vice versa. They are seperate operating companies for a multitude of reasons but primarily for the Ground business model of Independent Contractors. Just keeping it honest.
touch any part of Express and vice versa. They are seperate operating companies for a multitude of reasons but primarily for the Ground business model of Independent Contractors. Just keeping it honest.
We built AFW and GSO for airplanes. Express paid for those improvements.
How many trucks use them now?
Lots.
You still think we aren't supporting the Ground side?
How do you like your crow?
09-08-2015, 02:53 PM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2014
Posts: 296
Originally Posted by Flyinhigh
You will never get an argument from me concerning what a FedEx Pilot is worth. My comment was in reference to your lack of factual information about the separation of the operating companies at FDX. A package sent via FedEx Ground will NEVER
touch any part of Express and vice versa. They are seperate operating companies for a multitude of reasons but primarily for the Ground business model of Independent Contractors. Just keeping it honest.
touch any part of Express and vice versa. They are seperate operating companies for a multitude of reasons but primarily for the Ground business model of Independent Contractors. Just keeping it honest.
09-08-2015, 07:53 PM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Gear Monkey
Posts: 3,191
Originally Posted by TheBaron Deux
I have no problem with you or anyone else voting no. Free country, vote as you see fit. But please learn the difference between revenue and income and what Express contributes to the bottom line before you post such meaningless crap.
I'm an off & on again, long time poster...and sometimes lurker.
Right now, I'm trying to hard to sit back, lurk, and listen to all sides of this debate.
It appears you are the opposite --- short time poster, with extremely strong views on the TA.
It also appears that you post in order to influence (or maybe just refute) others --- though your choice of words and tone simply baffles me.
Additionally, your business knowledge and experience may not be as omniscient as you believe.
Valuing a business's worth using "gross revenue" is a very common valuation model...and in some industries, compensation contracts are specifically written as a percentage of gross revenues, not gross profits
It's often too easy for businesses to use various accounting techniques to manipulate expenses --- cash, non-cash, depreciation, other write-offs etc --- while gross revenues may be more transparent and more verifiable.
Thus, your characterization of his post as "meaningless crap" appears a bit misguided, as does some of your business acumen.
There were many reasons Delta pilots voted against their most recent TA.
One was because the "profit sharing formula" was being changed --- under the new TA, management bonuses would be subtracted out first, thereby reducing profit.
Delta pilots were concerned that the "profits" could be manipulated in some ways.
Additionally, the arrogance and tone of the "yes" voters was found offensive by many of the "no" voters. It motivated the "No" voters to work harder and find more creative ways to get their views out.
If your goal is to influence in favor of the TA, you may want to study what happened over at Delta a little more closely, and change your tactics.
In Unity...and Civility,
DLax
Last edited by DLax85; 09-08-2015 at 08:32 PM.
09-08-2015, 11:32 PM
#26
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 47
Originally Posted by HercMasterJ
Fact: The company values this TA at 1.7 Billion dollars over the next six years….
Fact: FedEx had 47.4 Billion dollars in revenue this year…
Fact: FedEx had 2.57 net adjusted income this year.
Simple math, 47.4 x 6yrs = 284.4 Billion in revenue over the life of the contract.
1.7 Billion is .59% of the revenue FedEx will receive over the next six years…not counting growth or the TNT merger aspects.
The company values the work we do at less than a 1% increase in the operating revenue over the term of the agreement. Pathetic.
I commend the NC for the work they’ve done, they’ve worked hard, but now it’s time to put in fresh crew. When I watch the TA Q&A videos, and see the ALPA National R&I chairman defending the company’s position on why they can’t afford to increase the A fund or B fund, I know it’s time for a new team.
Our work rules have not improved, but the company’s profits have. Either improve our work rules, or justly increase our compensation—10/3/3/3/4/3 will not cut it. And until someone has walked a mile in our hub turning shoes, no one can say we’re asking for too much…
1% is not asking too much.
My vote is NO.
Fact: FedEx had 47.4 Billion dollars in revenue this year…
Fact: FedEx had 2.57 net adjusted income this year.
Simple math, 47.4 x 6yrs = 284.4 Billion in revenue over the life of the contract.
1.7 Billion is .59% of the revenue FedEx will receive over the next six years…not counting growth or the TNT merger aspects.
The company values the work we do at less than a 1% increase in the operating revenue over the term of the agreement. Pathetic.
I commend the NC for the work they’ve done, they’ve worked hard, but now it’s time to put in fresh crew. When I watch the TA Q&A videos, and see the ALPA National R&I chairman defending the company’s position on why they can’t afford to increase the A fund or B fund, I know it’s time for a new team.
Our work rules have not improved, but the company’s profits have. Either improve our work rules, or justly increase our compensation—10/3/3/3/4/3 will not cut it. And until someone has walked a mile in our hub turning shoes, no one can say we’re asking for too much…
1% is not asking too much.
My vote is NO.
09-08-2015, 11:38 PM
#27
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 47
Can anyone honestly say that we don't deserve more?
Can anyone honestly say that the company can't pay more (and still be sustainable)?
Can anyone say that we did better than the company in this TA?
Back to negotiating.
FYI I'm usually one of the 60 percenters. In fact on the spectrum, I lean more towards the company than the union. As a straw poll with other of my ilk over 90 percent are voting NO.
Can anyone honestly say that the company can't pay more (and still be sustainable)?
Can anyone say that we did better than the company in this TA?
Back to negotiating.
FYI I'm usually one of the 60 percenters. In fact on the spectrum, I lean more towards the company than the union. As a straw poll with other of my ilk over 90 percent are voting NO.
09-09-2015, 05:00 AM
#28
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2015
Posts: 26
Completely agree J586. I've always been one of the 60% yes voters...until now.
I see this contract as symptomatic of what is going on in America today. Employees are made to feel like they should be fortunate to just have a job. Only management (and shareholders) can enjoy the rewards of a company's success - forget about rewarding those who actually did the work.
The pay increases in this contract barely match the government's dishonest numbers. The increases in the B fund are laughable compared to the savings the company gains by effectively freezing the A plan. Work rule changes will end up being neutral for us at best once the lawyers interpret them in ways other than intended.
I see this contract as symptomatic of what is going on in America today. Employees are made to feel like they should be fortunate to just have a job. Only management (and shareholders) can enjoy the rewards of a company's success - forget about rewarding those who actually did the work.
The pay increases in this contract barely match the government's dishonest numbers. The increases in the B fund are laughable compared to the savings the company gains by effectively freezing the A plan. Work rule changes will end up being neutral for us at best once the lawyers interpret them in ways other than intended.
09-09-2015, 05:21 AM
#29
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Position: Counting down the bid packs
Posts: 96
Originally Posted by DLax85
Hi Baron -
I'm an off & on again, long time poster...and sometimes lurker.
Right now, I'm trying to hard to sit back, lurk, and listen to all sides of this debate.
It appears you are the opposite --- short time poster, with extremely strong views on the TA.
It also appears that you post in order to influence (or maybe just refute) others --- though your choice of words and tone simply baffles me.
Additionally, your business knowledge and experience may not be as omniscient as you believe.
Valuing a business's worth using "gross revenue" is a very common valuation model...and in some industries, compensation contracts are specifically written as a percentage of gross revenues, not gross profits
It's often too easy for businesses to use various accounting techniques to manipulate expenses --- cash, non-cash, depreciation, other write-offs etc --- while gross revenues may be more transparent and more verifiable.
Thus, your characterization of his post as "meaningless crap" appears a bit misguided, as does some of your business acumen.
There were many reasons Delta pilots voted against their most recent TA.
One was because the "profit sharing formula" was being changed --- under the new TA, management bonuses would be subtracted out first, thereby reducing profit.
Delta pilots were concerned that the "profits" could be manipulated in some ways.
Additionally, the arrogance and tone of the "yes" voters was found offensive by many of the "no" voters. It motivated the "No" voters to work harder and find more creative ways to get their views out.
If your goal is to influence in favor of the TA, you may want to study what happened over at Delta a little more closely, and change your tactics.
In Unity...and Civility,
DLax
I'm an off & on again, long time poster...and sometimes lurker.
Right now, I'm trying to hard to sit back, lurk, and listen to all sides of this debate.
It appears you are the opposite --- short time poster, with extremely strong views on the TA.
It also appears that you post in order to influence (or maybe just refute) others --- though your choice of words and tone simply baffles me.
Additionally, your business knowledge and experience may not be as omniscient as you believe.
Valuing a business's worth using "gross revenue" is a very common valuation model...and in some industries, compensation contracts are specifically written as a percentage of gross revenues, not gross profits
It's often too easy for businesses to use various accounting techniques to manipulate expenses --- cash, non-cash, depreciation, other write-offs etc --- while gross revenues may be more transparent and more verifiable.
Thus, your characterization of his post as "meaningless crap" appears a bit misguided, as does some of your business acumen.
There were many reasons Delta pilots voted against their most recent TA.
One was because the "profit sharing formula" was being changed --- under the new TA, management bonuses would be subtracted out first, thereby reducing profit.
Delta pilots were concerned that the "profits" could be manipulated in some ways.
Additionally, the arrogance and tone of the "yes" voters was found offensive by many of the "no" voters. It motivated the "No" voters to work harder and find more creative ways to get their views out.
If your goal is to influence in favor of the TA, you may want to study what happened over at Delta a little more closely, and change your tactics.
In Unity...and Civility,
DLax
I have been on APC since 2006. I bought a new computer and failed to transfer all my log-in info to it....been about 2 years. I requested a password reset but the email I used to originally set the account up under no longer exists. I sent an email to the administrators but they never responded. Therefore, I started a new account. Can't believe so many are too dumb to see the correlation between TheBaron Deux (2) and TheBaron. Duh!
I have been at FedEx over 10 years. I voted for the 2006 contract. I voted against the FDA LOA. I voted for the interim contract. I haven't decided how I will vote for this TA.
I'll stick with my interpretation of the companies current financials. If you look over the last three years, FedEx Ground has been the leader in revenue, income and margins. I understand that historically, they owe their existence to Express and there are still many mutually beneficial dependencies, but Express isn't what it once was.
What irritates me is the numerous threads that have been started and carried on for multiple pages where the initial post was completely inaccurate. Everyone piles on about some crappy piece of the contract that the original poster had completely wrong. I can give numerous examples...probably close to half the TA threads are started with bogus information.
The next thing is the apparent sense of entitlement expressed by so many. Pretty big bunch of egos. We have some incredible pilots, some really good pilots, some average pilots, and some questionable pilots. The bell curve may be slightly skewed towards the higher percentiles, but not by as much as many seem to think. So what are we "worth"...what do we "deserve"
People aren't happy that our pay raise will only be slightly higher than the median income for a family four. I think $300k + is pretty respectable, regardless of the gangsta's on this forum complaining that we are being disrespected. Word NWA.
If you want to complain about some point of the contract, just keep it factual. Like, for example, why are the per diem rates being touted as industry leading when they are still behind UPS's current contract.
Here's another. I went back through all my pay recaps to March of 2013, when we should have gotten a pay raise and didn't. Figured the 10% TA offer was 3 1/3% a year (March 2013, 2014, 2015) Plugged it all into a spreadsheet and see I should have made an extra $37211. Doesn't seem right that the signing "bonus" is only $23,500 (and only 95% of that). Of course, every pilot is going to have something different based on their seat and schedule. Some maybe more, some less. Looks to me like the company is trying to go cheap and save upwards of $50,000,000. Looks like a pretty nice incentive for them to continuously drag their feet in negotiations. I have brought both these points up to the union in their Q&A section and gotten no response.
Tempus Fugit
Last edited by TheBaron Deux; 09-09-2015 at 05:41 AM.
09-09-2015, 05:36 AM
#30
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Position: Counting down the bid packs
Posts: 96
Originally Posted by DLax85
Hi Baron -
Additionally, your business knowledge and experience may not be as omniscient as you believe.
Valuing a business's worth using "gross revenue" is a very common valuation model...and in some industries, compensation contracts are specifically written as a percentage of gross revenues, not gross profits
It's often too easy for businesses to use various accounting techniques to manipulate expenses --- cash, non-cash, depreciation, other write-offs etc --- while gross revenues may be more transparent and more verifiable.
Thus, your characterization of his post as "meaningless crap" appears a bit misguided, as does some of your business acumen.
In Unity...and Civility,
DLax
Additionally, your business knowledge and experience may not be as omniscient as you believe.
Valuing a business's worth using "gross revenue" is a very common valuation model...and in some industries, compensation contracts are specifically written as a percentage of gross revenues, not gross profits
It's often too easy for businesses to use various accounting techniques to manipulate expenses --- cash, non-cash, depreciation, other write-offs etc --- while gross revenues may be more transparent and more verifiable.
Thus, your characterization of his post as "meaningless crap" appears a bit misguided, as does some of your business acumen.
In Unity...and Civility,
DLax
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Breton
Hangar Talk
0
06-24-2005 02:53 PM
