Raptor

Block 6 rep brings up a very good point in how this pilot group has turned two TAs in its history. And the results have been improvements.

https://fdx.alpa.org/Home/Content/ContentView/tabid/3125/ArticleId/8063/Council-26-Message-from-Block-6-Representative-9-21-15.aspx

Remember also, FDA LOA was originally inadequate and the company wanted it so badly, that they read the boards and the mood of the pilot group, and unilaterally improved it while voting was in progress? The STV problem the company had, they tried to solve with direct dealing while voting was underway.

Remember also that we wanted major improvements for the postal LOA. The company wanted two days more work. We never agreed and the sky didn't fall. Even without the agreement, BLGs went up and the pilot group outcome was positive. Anyone look back with sadness we didn't give in back then?

We gave up a day for first class DH and now we give that back without getting the day of work back?

Company has already put out a commitment they would not use 6 week bid periods first according to NC. Who wants to bet we will see the company put out more "side letters" to try to quell angst over "problematic" portions of the TA? When do you think the threat we will not get the TNT long haul flying as expected--if we don't pass the TA will be floated/leaked by the company? These things would make it very clear to me we have a lot of leverage and would only harden my NO vote.

Anyone with a more detailed memory of these two TA vote downs, postal period negotiations, and FDA LOAs, etc care to share those details to help us show the path forward to those who are only thinking of voting yes because they fear the unknown?

RedeyeAV8r

FYI, The 1st Failed TA was under ALPA 1's in 1995. It was so insulting that ALPA didn't endorse it and had exhausted all efforts with a weak membership, so they put it out for a vote anyway. It failed. It probably would have passed if there had been more members in Good standing who would have been eligible to vote.

The Second Failed TA was under the Original FPA ( all the original NO guys leading an in house Union) in 1997 and was presented by the FPA Lead Negotiator, our now former VP of Flying who is headed to Europe to oversee the TNT deal. It was also insulting but it almost passed if it hadn't been for several hard working Union minded individuals who stuffed lockers and mail boxes on their own nickel and their own time. Email and social media wasn't really a big thing yet.

Also at the time, we were in Legal Self help from NOV 1995 to the 1998. The 3rd TA passed only after the Union (FPA) was effectively Busted. The 3rd TA was concessionary but was less so than TA 1 or 2. To be fair though Under the original FCH (Fake contract handbook) Management was systematically changing things at a rapid pace. Trip paid for vacation conflict. If a vacation day touched a trip you got entire Trip credit, gone, Substitution Policy invented, you use to just get get paid and had No obligation, Military Leave Policy use to be awesome, Gone with the tear of a page.

The FDX Pilots have come a long way, but sometimes I think we haven't learned a thing.

Viper446

Lots of former Union leaders got a lot by those past contracts. Most of us didn't. In the past, it was almost as if the company had negotiators on both sides of the table. FF and the parking lot deal was a screw job. I do think we have learned and I do believe our leadership is better. But, we still need to press for whats right. If some on the MEC and NC have to step down because of fatigue, or a lack of faith in what we can really obtain, so be it. I wish them luck and my thanks for doing a thankless job. But I'm ready to keep pressing, I know we can do better.

Mark2792

What about turning down number THREE!

yobob333

Ya , sorry no credibility. Vote NO and let's move on, this TA sucks!

kronan

Turned down the Postal LOA, wasn't at FedEx for that but heard it was voted down because we had leverage

ClutchCargo

I don't recall a postal LOA. Company said forget it after we demanded full section 6 reopen. Or maybe that was your point...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

RedeyeAV8r

You are correct, the Company wanted an LOA.

They wanted to increase TAFB contractual limits, and their proposal
was similiar to this SLB flow.

If you worked an extra 2 days, you "Might" get extra pay @ 150%.

Yes the Union asked for a lot, but recall, the Company came to the FPA for relief, and during LOA negotiations there were a lot of Vacations sold back and there was a lot of DFT/VLT going on. The Union didn't fail, A portion of the Membership did. Sound familiar?

MaxKts

They wanted us to give up 1 day off for nothing and if they needed a second day then you would get the 150%! They managed to make it work without us giving up anything. How many of those 150% days do you think we would of ever seen? All we would have done is give up a day at home. I am very glad the postal TA never happened!

RedeyeAV8r

Actually, they (The Company) managed to make it work with our help, at least some of our help. Vacation buy backs, make up, DFT/VLT all while the Union was trying to get something for pilots. We never seem to grasp how much power we have, and fail to ever exercise it when it counts.

Remember the Coffee Jug Movement? While it was an insignifcant thing imo, The Line Pilots acted with Resolve. Now nobody has to carry a coffee jug to/from the aircraft.

And for a shot time, the Captain's Jumpseat Authority. All Captains showed resolve by exercising Captain's Authority in deciding who rode on their Jets. I only saw Pilots getting to ride during that time. The Company took a few hostages but the Pilots showed resolve and financially supported them. Now we have Captain's Authority.

As always, the Management NC looks past the Union NC to see what the Line pilots are doing. Whats different about this last round of Negotiations and the Average TA? Apparently they think the Line Pilots are Happy, why wouldn't they?