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.

Probably won't get your message until Monday. He writes like someone who might spend a lot of times at, say, a renaissance fair. I hear they run long on Sunday. :D

Is this guy even a pilot?
 

He certainly doesn't write like one!*?

I recommend that we ignore this "PolicyWonk" guy. He's almost certainly one of the previous basement dwelling High School kids posting from his parents basement after watching a few aviation movies. Has he been previously banned under other names and now accusing others of the same tactic?

If I thought there was any chance he was actually a pilot, I'd be inclined to ask him some ATP questions to see if he had any idea what I was talking about. I wonder how he found out about our proposed A380 pay rates?

He suddenly appears a few days before TA voting opens?

Mods ... this guy doesn't add anything to the conversation, is there any way to ban him?


:eek:

"Mods ... this guy doesn't add anything to the conversation, is there any way to ban him?"

Well, he does add a little bit of entertainment value.

Like when he says the A380 rates were just a "misunderstanding" during negotiations.

Maybe the arbitrator took into account that back in 2007 the retirement age changed so everyone at the top got five more years, plenty of money to help offset a cola. Then everyone one else will have to wait for the next contract. Then again he probably does not care what happened in the past!

I know this ship sailed a long time ago. Why does the 777 pay the same rate as the small Airbus? Why does the 757 pay the same as the 727 although it carries more cargo, more efficient to operate, common type with 767, and has one less crew member.

Sigh....

Wonder why Mr Policywonk started his 57 threads and then left the building? Wants to start a discussion, or wants to troll?

I'll start it up again. Pg, 2. Table of contents. I'm not happy how the contents were arranged. We should fight this! :):):)

My guess is you ****ed him off.

Wait a minute, they didn't revise this.....

But I agree, it should have been revised!!

I actually don't want to **** anyone off. I just am aggravated by trolls.

And that fact that I couldn't put in a smiley face, because we are limited to three images, and you took them all!

You could have deleted his :eek:

Oh, just like a FedEx pilot, so selfish!:D

I considered that. But then I wouldn't have anything to ***** about....

So you are just here to ****** and not really contribute to the discussion. Mods, where are you? Busdriver12 is continually calling on you to delete posts and get the discussion back on track but he can't seem to follow his own requests! :rolleyes:

Oh, you lie, I have never called on them to delete posts, but I really should report your microaggressions! Just like using too many icons, so I can't use them. Microaggressions! There must be some college campus I can complain about this on:D

Our moderators should have:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banhammer

Ironically, They would have used it on me. I have been censored ( I mentioned communism).

I can quickly scan any post and mentally delete. But others take so much joy in being spelling grammar Nazis, its fun to tease them. Its very easy to attack the poster and not the idea. Is surprising the emotion and mission creep that tangentially deflects most posts off topic.

someone please

How many grievances have been filed. Or mediation requests/ disputes like a 380 vs 777 has the union WON?

I'd like a hammer such as that to stop intruders!

You nailed one of my major pet peeves. Using spelling or grammar errors to mock a poster, when one cannot argue against the point. Attacking the poster personally, not the argument, setting off just another useless ****ing contest. A reason, I believe, why many people read, but are unwilling to post on this forum.