Memphis road show 9-10
09-11-2015, 12:56 PM
#111
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,838
Originally Posted by TonyC
Would it have been than hard to specify Business Lie Flat?
You know, tying up all that loose language and all.
We already have examples of three carriers with 180 degree flat seats.
.
I also recall in the past we had Higher Class of service Guaranteed when the DH segment was in excess of 5 hours.
Then the RJ's starting replacing Mainline Jets on certain routes and SWA expanded to many of our DH Segment markets OAK-BWI for example. All of a sudden many of our 1st Class DH's went away because First Class had to be "Available" on the Company selected flight. Can't wait until SWA starts flying BWI to LHR to CDG
09-11-2015, 01:06 PM
#112
Organizational Learning
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: Directly behind the combiner
Posts: 4,948
Originally Posted by FDXLAG
Ok Tony tell me what you want the DB plan cap to be to get your yes vote. Give me a number 262 263 264 ... Stop me when I get there. 265 Fred's rich I say 266.
Sure, like the car salesman who meets you at the door and starts with, "Tell me how much you want to spend." HA!
A wide-body Captain earning the top pay rate and working a normal schedule with Average BLG should be able to get 50% of that income in his Defined Benefit Plan. The higher the Pay Rate, the higher the FAE cap.
We publish "Improve DB Plan" instead of "Raise FAE Cap to X Dollars" because it would be stupid to negotiate with ourselves in public. But when your Defined Benefit is supposed to be 2% x 25 Years of Service (for those who are keeping track, that's 50% at the top end) times the Final Average Earnings, the result should not be less than 50% of Final Average Earnings!
(I take it by your effort to misdirect that my assumption was correct, that you were confusing different IRS limits. I hope you'll reconsider your position now that you realize your previous understandings were erroneous.)
.
09-11-2015, 01:19 PM
#115
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2015
Posts: 26
Originally Posted by Raptor
I don't complain just to complain. I fill out PORs all the time. A lot of what I fill out has been fixed. I praise FedEx to everyone I meet and in every conversation that I strike up when deadheading, waiting for crew transport in uniform, etc.
I have read all the highlights, read the entire TA and paid attention to all the colors' meanings. I've read all posts on here. I've read all the postings on the ALPA website to include the Q&A. I have looked at every video. I have gone out of my way to find strong yes voters to find out why. I try to use facts in my postings. I don't find any MEC members or leadership wanting or in need of recall. I think the NC did the best they could with the leverage they had, but I think they pulled the trigger too early, for too little, and with too many givebacks and new fuzzy language. And, if this TA is turned down, I would think we need a fresh NC.
I heard the Ford CEO called FS when the Toluca flight didn't operate for two days in a row and a plant had to shut down as its just-in-time inventory didn't arrive. I heard that up to 14 flights a night for a week or more didn't operate because there weren't pilots to fill them. I saw a tremendous number of X-pairings added to try unsuccessfully to make up the backlog. I heard many, many pilots were repeated being called for draft--even when on the Do Not Call option.
These individual (not collective) actions of many because the company was pi$$ing them off allowed them to enjoy a great QOL with their families.
The company finally came to the table and I heard they opened their books under Non-Disclosure agreements. I heard the argument was that this contract takes a year's profits. I heard that raising the cap on the A plan took another year of profits and the company "couldn't afford it". I think that's why the NC and MEC are convinced this is the best we could do. But, I think that is a misleading assumption. FedEx is smart and their hired negotiating puppet masters (Ford and Harrison) are very skilled at these contract games.
The NC got what they could with the leverage they had at the time. Turning down the TA with a strong NO vote adds to the leverage and changes the equation. And, we may see clearer negotiating goals especially when I think there are 5 major reasons this TA will be turned down.
1) Duration--too long to fix the unexpected consequences of FedEx taking more than they are given. Too long at low pay rates.
2) Low pay raises. Higher ones would have made it feel like we had received something of value for our givebacks.
3) Very little gained in retirement. B plan gains of 2% are a joke since there's no cash over cap. A plan dies a slow death since no increase in cap.
4) Asking pilots to fly sick and fly extra to get retirement "bonus" at 50 cents on the dollar. Insulting and has trickle down consequences for Captains and F/O in QOL.
5) Making FDA pilots vote against it because of the Hotel In Lieu Of changes and many other pilots like me who value deviating and see section 8 as a big give back.
People fret about what's the path forward if we turn this down. I don't have that answer, but I know CD and the MEC have plans. Unlike the Delta MEC which seemed ill prepared when their TA was turned down, we have at least thought about the path forward after October 20th if the vote is NO.
I don't know if the company will do a quick sweetener right away to keep peak mellow or if they will drag it out another two years. I don't know if what we get in the TA after this will be better--I hope it is. I don't know if we will be better off financially with a new TA, but I know that we won't suffer some of these QOL issues that we will give up with this TA.
I think the new NC will see what didn't fly and fix it better that it is now. They will have additional leverage with a big NO vote for both the company and the NMB. If this takes two more years, that's OK by me. I won't see my medical costs rise more than 6% a year in the mean time. I won't see senior pilots flying sick and making me sick while they chase the shiny star at the end of the rainbow. I won't see senior pilots delaying needed medical procedures because they want to maximize their amount over $520,000. I won't see my QOL decrease by not having the senior pilots drop sweet international trips into open time. I won't have to pay for a couple of more vacations as I use hotel in lieu of deadhead to the max. I won't pay out of pocket to deadhead in coach because my bank was based on a foreign carrier's cheap business fare and I don't live near one of their gateways. I won't have to live with a TA without knowing in advance what I'm voting for: I don't know my medical costs since they are 18% of "something"; I don't know how the secondary working group will pan out since I have no vote--it's just the company and the union hashing it out without a pilot vote; I don't want to give the company and union carte blanche either to fix a potential FAR 117 cargo cut-out being applied (no one seems to have picked up on this language and discussed it yet)--once again without a pilot vote.
By waiting I will probably get to see Delta rates, SWA rates, and UPS contract and rates. We don't have a "me too" for pay raises like many of the PAX carriers do, so I think it would be nice to find out how the industry is leading us, instead of us leading the industry to a contract. I will get to see if the health care "Cadillac Tax" is repealed or modified for union workers (as we aren't the only ones who will be impacted by this). I will get to see actual numbers and plans instead of just some nebulous compensation will be returned to the pilot and when the question is asked on Q&A the union says it won't be guaranteed to be a cash payment! I expect the company and union to work out the new PBS plan while we're going around the second time on a TA. Then I will get to vote on the plan to see if I like how the PBS for secondary lines has its parameters set up, what the soft and hard parameters are, who holds the keys, the dispute process, etc. I would like to vote on that rather than have it presented to me as fait-accompli. Maybe it would be a deal killer in itself, but if we pass this TA, we're stuck with it as we get no individual say.
I don't know the road forward, but there are benefits to waiting just as there are detriments. So it's not all doom and gloom if it doesn't pass.
What I really want more than anything else is for everyone to read the TA and to listen to all points of view. I think it's sad that at this point the number I can see on the YouTube videos and from the union statements are that only 1/4 of the pilots are engaged enough to be doing their due diligence. I really do believe that since the union voted to send this to the pilots that many people will see only the positive side as presented to them. If they don't see and consider the negative side, there is no hope--it will pass. But, if we can get the word out and engage the majority of pilots either verbally or by someone putting out a good anti-TA handout I don't see how the majority of pilots will vote for this. I have to believe that people will consider how this will affect many pilots and not vote solely on how it will affect them.
If pilots had both points of view and were engaged, I really could live with a YES or NO vote. At least then, I would feel the system worked.
I have read all the highlights, read the entire TA and paid attention to all the colors' meanings. I've read all posts on here. I've read all the postings on the ALPA website to include the Q&A. I have looked at every video. I have gone out of my way to find strong yes voters to find out why. I try to use facts in my postings. I don't find any MEC members or leadership wanting or in need of recall. I think the NC did the best they could with the leverage they had, but I think they pulled the trigger too early, for too little, and with too many givebacks and new fuzzy language. And, if this TA is turned down, I would think we need a fresh NC.
I heard the Ford CEO called FS when the Toluca flight didn't operate for two days in a row and a plant had to shut down as its just-in-time inventory didn't arrive. I heard that up to 14 flights a night for a week or more didn't operate because there weren't pilots to fill them. I saw a tremendous number of X-pairings added to try unsuccessfully to make up the backlog. I heard many, many pilots were repeated being called for draft--even when on the Do Not Call option.
These individual (not collective) actions of many because the company was pi$$ing them off allowed them to enjoy a great QOL with their families.
The company finally came to the table and I heard they opened their books under Non-Disclosure agreements. I heard the argument was that this contract takes a year's profits. I heard that raising the cap on the A plan took another year of profits and the company "couldn't afford it". I think that's why the NC and MEC are convinced this is the best we could do. But, I think that is a misleading assumption. FedEx is smart and their hired negotiating puppet masters (Ford and Harrison) are very skilled at these contract games.
The NC got what they could with the leverage they had at the time. Turning down the TA with a strong NO vote adds to the leverage and changes the equation. And, we may see clearer negotiating goals especially when I think there are 5 major reasons this TA will be turned down.
1) Duration--too long to fix the unexpected consequences of FedEx taking more than they are given. Too long at low pay rates.
2) Low pay raises. Higher ones would have made it feel like we had received something of value for our givebacks.
3) Very little gained in retirement. B plan gains of 2% are a joke since there's no cash over cap. A plan dies a slow death since no increase in cap.
4) Asking pilots to fly sick and fly extra to get retirement "bonus" at 50 cents on the dollar. Insulting and has trickle down consequences for Captains and F/O in QOL.
5) Making FDA pilots vote against it because of the Hotel In Lieu Of changes and many other pilots like me who value deviating and see section 8 as a big give back.
People fret about what's the path forward if we turn this down. I don't have that answer, but I know CD and the MEC have plans. Unlike the Delta MEC which seemed ill prepared when their TA was turned down, we have at least thought about the path forward after October 20th if the vote is NO.
I don't know if the company will do a quick sweetener right away to keep peak mellow or if they will drag it out another two years. I don't know if what we get in the TA after this will be better--I hope it is. I don't know if we will be better off financially with a new TA, but I know that we won't suffer some of these QOL issues that we will give up with this TA.
I think the new NC will see what didn't fly and fix it better that it is now. They will have additional leverage with a big NO vote for both the company and the NMB. If this takes two more years, that's OK by me. I won't see my medical costs rise more than 6% a year in the mean time. I won't see senior pilots flying sick and making me sick while they chase the shiny star at the end of the rainbow. I won't see senior pilots delaying needed medical procedures because they want to maximize their amount over $520,000. I won't see my QOL decrease by not having the senior pilots drop sweet international trips into open time. I won't have to pay for a couple of more vacations as I use hotel in lieu of deadhead to the max. I won't pay out of pocket to deadhead in coach because my bank was based on a foreign carrier's cheap business fare and I don't live near one of their gateways. I won't have to live with a TA without knowing in advance what I'm voting for: I don't know my medical costs since they are 18% of "something"; I don't know how the secondary working group will pan out since I have no vote--it's just the company and the union hashing it out without a pilot vote; I don't want to give the company and union carte blanche either to fix a potential FAR 117 cargo cut-out being applied (no one seems to have picked up on this language and discussed it yet)--once again without a pilot vote.
By waiting I will probably get to see Delta rates, SWA rates, and UPS contract and rates. We don't have a "me too" for pay raises like many of the PAX carriers do, so I think it would be nice to find out how the industry is leading us, instead of us leading the industry to a contract. I will get to see if the health care "Cadillac Tax" is repealed or modified for union workers (as we aren't the only ones who will be impacted by this). I will get to see actual numbers and plans instead of just some nebulous compensation will be returned to the pilot and when the question is asked on Q&A the union says it won't be guaranteed to be a cash payment! I expect the company and union to work out the new PBS plan while we're going around the second time on a TA. Then I will get to vote on the plan to see if I like how the PBS for secondary lines has its parameters set up, what the soft and hard parameters are, who holds the keys, the dispute process, etc. I would like to vote on that rather than have it presented to me as fait-accompli. Maybe it would be a deal killer in itself, but if we pass this TA, we're stuck with it as we get no individual say.
I don't know the road forward, but there are benefits to waiting just as there are detriments. So it's not all doom and gloom if it doesn't pass.
What I really want more than anything else is for everyone to read the TA and to listen to all points of view. I think it's sad that at this point the number I can see on the YouTube videos and from the union statements are that only 1/4 of the pilots are engaged enough to be doing their due diligence. I really do believe that since the union voted to send this to the pilots that many people will see only the positive side as presented to them. If they don't see and consider the negative side, there is no hope--it will pass. But, if we can get the word out and engage the majority of pilots either verbally or by someone putting out a good anti-TA handout I don't see how the majority of pilots will vote for this. I have to believe that people will consider how this will affect many pilots and not vote solely on how it will affect them.
If pilots had both points of view and were engaged, I really could live with a YES or NO vote. At least then, I would feel the system worked.
I agree 100%.
09-11-2015, 01:28 PM
#116
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Position: Retired
Posts: 980
Originally Posted by FDXLAG
Ok Tony tell me what you want the DB plan cap to be to get your yes vote. Give me a number 262 263 264 ... Stop me when I get there. 265 Fred's rich I say 266.
09-11-2015, 01:29 PM
#117
"blue collar thug"!
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: A proponent of...
Posts: 1,614
From what I can see, it looks like we have close to a 50/50 split on APC for and against. Perfect for the order out of chaos playbook for the Company.
And, is it really a decent contract if 50% say it is? Or even 65%? Think about it.
And, is it really a decent contract if 50% say it is? Or even 65%? Think about it.
09-11-2015, 01:32 PM
#118
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
S
I agree with you but than I don't think we should have pulled out of Iraq just to meet a campaign promise either.
Originally Posted by FoxHunter
I'm not sure there ever should have been a cap. Since it is there it should at least be adjusted for inflation. It was $260,000 in 1998 so it should be just over $380,000 in 2015 and adjusted for inflation every year.
09-11-2015, 01:34 PM
#119
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2012
Posts: 711
Another benefit of waiting is that we get to see the TNT acquisition close. Since there were no changes to Section 1, Scope, saying NO to this TA will have no effect one way or another.
But, we will get to see if the promised long haul flying comes to FedEx painted planes flow by FedEx pilots on our seniority list.
I'd heard (from a union committee chair) that our scope language had a problem and that FedEx could sell the "foreign airline" but retain some sort of control. This is very poorly sourced on my part so if someone else has an idea what this is about, post here. What I took it to mean was something like Virgin America where Branson was forced to change out CEOs because the original one was too beholden to Branson even though "at arms length"? It's possible to sell a foreign airline but still have it do your bidding I would think.
So, if we had a TA and FedEx used some sort of loophole we didn't like, we would be stuck doing anything about it for nearly a decade. If we don't have a TA, and they pulled the same stunt, don't you think we would have something to say about it in negotiations? Don't you think individual pilots may get pi$$ed off again?
Not all doom and gloom. Benefits to waiting and not locking in a bad deal.
But, we will get to see if the promised long haul flying comes to FedEx painted planes flow by FedEx pilots on our seniority list.
I'd heard (from a union committee chair) that our scope language had a problem and that FedEx could sell the "foreign airline" but retain some sort of control. This is very poorly sourced on my part so if someone else has an idea what this is about, post here. What I took it to mean was something like Virgin America where Branson was forced to change out CEOs because the original one was too beholden to Branson even though "at arms length"? It's possible to sell a foreign airline but still have it do your bidding I would think.
So, if we had a TA and FedEx used some sort of loophole we didn't like, we would be stuck doing anything about it for nearly a decade. If we don't have a TA, and they pulled the same stunt, don't you think we would have something to say about it in negotiations? Don't you think individual pilots may get pi$$ed off again?
Not all doom and gloom. Benefits to waiting and not locking in a bad deal.
09-11-2015, 01:36 PM
#120
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2012
Posts: 711
Originally Posted by FoxHunter
I'm not sure there ever should have been a cap. Since it is there it should at least be adjusted for inflation. It was $260,000 in 1998 so it should be just over $380,000 in 2015 and adjusted for inflation every year.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
