A-380/777 payrate
 

I would like to know how much we have saved the company by virtue of flying the 777 at MD-11 rates instead of A-380 rates.

I understand that there were misunderstandings during negotiations in 2006. I'm not pointing fingers.

I'm glad to know how much the TA wll cost, compared to the stasis imposed by an impartial arbitrator on this issue.

But I'd also like two other numbers, and I think the mediator should also know them if he doesn't already. If he doesn't, that's our fault.

How much more will this contract cost if we deduct what we lost on the A-380/777 payrates misunderstanding? Past tense.

And how much will we lose on this misunderstanding, going forward?

Again, compared to how we are benefiting by the topline numbers that I deem reliable. I'm not contesting that methodology, but then, I'm nearly ignorant of that series of formulation.

Let's try a thought experiment. Try to envisage yourself nine years ago deliberating on that TA?

Regardless of how you voted, if there were only two payscales (the lower two), would you have voted in the affirmative?

If there was no A-380 payrate, would you have contented yourself with an A-plan basis of 260? Would it have passed? I think not. It would have required at least 300. Then. Nevermind the interim profligate creation of currency.

I'd like to see those two numbers presented to us. One looking backwards. One looking forwards. The A-380 misunderstanding.

I think it will help the mediator see things our way.

260 basis was based on a misunderstanding. Nine years ago.

Please, please, don't misinterpret this as advocacy of a third payrate. That would delay a potentially quick remedy.

I think if you believe an arbitrator is going to benefit the FedEx pilot group by raising a pay rate, you need to review the last 777 arbitration results.

Outside entities are not going to pull up your rates to industry leading benchmarks, or at least they haven't in the past. I thought they would last round, and I got schooled. "I think the mediator will see things our way..." is hope. I had the hope wrung out of me a few arbitrations back.

Judging by the numbers who eagerly bid the jet to be part of the initial cadre, it appears the 777 rate was not only adequate, it was desirable.

I was looking forward to retiring with a new contract. With all these great added things you are getting me in the new TA I guess I will have to stay until 65.

I thought your humility the other day was a highlight of what I've read here. You bear scars. I also could bare scars, for I bear scars. Really, I'm hard pressed to think of a better post than yours after intermittent reading for multiple years.

The mediator won't raise rates. Certainly. Nor an arbitrator.

But it informs the baseline we use for comparison. Especially vis-a-vis the trade off in A-380 payrates vs keeping a 260 basis for retirement. He needs to know why he read us wrong.

Further, consider if the company were to raise the basis to 300 or 330. It would be a carrot for guys to achieve amidst the meager availability of pilots that looms before us.

Win-win.

It will probably take you that long just to read through all these great new threads.
I was just thinking to myself the other day..."You know, what this forum really needs is someone who is willing to list the things they don't like with the new TA." And like manna from heaven, Policywonk shows up. Telephone call reimbursement... I have finally found my reason to vote no.:rolleyes:

Sorry to keep you up so late, Rock (et al).

You have been consistently cavalier, along with various other call signs you use on here. I think you like to talk to yourself using different sign-ins. But you have a number of "tells" although you disguise the various identities well.

It comes off as clever, but I perceive it as crass. And this in spite of the fact that I don't strongly disagree with the positions you espouse, even under various names, if I perceive arightly. But I don't have an inside line to the NSA to accuse you with certainty.

If I am awry, and you are an active FedEx pilot, with one callsign, and I knew who you are, I would apologize profusely and buy you a month's worth of grog.

I would hate to think I'm accusing an honest line guy, especially a friend. But your writing is really, really suss and has been for a long time.

I don't want your grog. But I made this offer previously to someone who accused me of being in management. I'll make the same to you. I will PM you my employee number if you PM me yours. We can even work through a neutral third party if you like. If I have ever posted on APC under any name other than Rock, and if I am not an active FedEx pilot (757/FO) you get my lump sum payment from whenever we get a TA accomplished. If you are wrong, and I actually am Rock, with no other APC names, and I actually am a 757/FO, I get your lump sum payment. Deal?

There is no way that anyone, even a moderator, can verify that you haven't posted under a different name, using different emails to establish your various handles.

Trust, but verify.

One portion of the wager is not remotely verifiable.

Do they pay you double time for nights on the weekends?

Have you not attended the road show? The median age is 64.2 for retirement. Going out early is a myth for the vast majority.


"Oh, I see.... you want more money, but you mean it this time...."

Policy, Just vote. One way or another.