I didn't see that it directly named anyone, just 'management', but I could have missed it. I suspect they want to say comforting things to the shareholders, with vague references, to not alarm them in any way.

 

And, they are not concerned about alarming this pilot group.

 

" FedEx's management stated that it won't impact the company's projected profit growth trajectory. Other productivity-enhancing initiatives will more than offset the pilots' higher pay."

 

"So, I can't really give you a definitive answer about how the company will truly benefit from this. I'm pretty confident they will based on my inner cynic and past observations. The "asks" they put into this TA were calculated and targeted. Maybe those won't "pay" for our gains completely - but I think it's a lot closer than you might think. "

I completely agree with this. My inner cynic is what has me questioning, also. I am trying to figure out ways that we can get optimized in this TA, as I assume if there is any wiggle room, the company will say, "Well, that's how we interpret that section". And good luck getting it changed. They should really look in the mirror and ask themselves why we have so little trust. However, that same inner cynic wonders if any of the things I have concern over would be changed if we turned this TA down.

But I still can't see any way they can possibly get enough productivity and cost savings out of this to make it cost neutral. Some other poor FedEx employees are paying for much of this.

 

This is a crock...You sound like one of their managers.

Why is it that some think the only way to get something is to take something away from one of the other employee groups? Whether, it's new hire pilots, ramp agents, schedulers, mechanics, etc?

This friggin' company is making money, hand over fist, richly rewarding the executive management, increasing the dividends and buying back enormous amounts of stock! Good grief, even Carl Icahn, the father of sh!tting on employees is now recognizing this:

“...The average worker makes approximately $50,000 per year. The average annual compensation of the thirty highest paid CEOs is approximately $47 million per year. (I don’t believe this disparity was ever this great even in most dictatorships!) ...”

Trust me...I never thought I could agree with anything that man says. In fact, I threw up a little bit when I first read it.

How much profit is enough? How much needs to be taken from the workers? Think, "A Plans".

Your type of thinking is pathetic!

 

Um.... little over the top, here?

I didn't say I thought it was right, merely that I didn't see huge productivity gains enough to pay for our TA, just that apparently some other poor suckers are being tapped to pay for it. Just a guess, just my opinion. Not saying it's a good thing. Calm down, now!

 

Pilots Are About to Get a 10% Raise -- What You Need to Know -- The Motley Fool

"....As a result, FedEx has historically boasted one of the lowest costs of operation for employee wage, salary, and benefits, out of any of the major transportation companies. "Salaries and employee benefits " cost FedEx only $16.2 billion in fiscal 2014 -- less than 39% of "total operating expenses," and an even smaller percentage of the company's $45.6 billion in fiscal 2014 revenues.
Now consider that although richly compensated, FedEx's 4,200 pilots only represent only about 1.3% of FedEx's 325,000 "team members." Even a large 10% increase in salaries, when applied to such a small sliver of FedEx's workforce, probably isn't going to break the bank -- or even appreciably raise overall labor costs for FedEx.
Simply put, while the money FedEx pays its pilots may boggle ordinary American workers' minds, this is a raise that FedEx can easily afford to pay. And even in the unlikely event that the pay hike does start to pinch profits -- hey, December is just around the corner. FedEx can always hike its prices by another 5% (as it does pretty much every year, like clockwork) to cover the difference.
Problem solved."

and

5 Things FedEx Management Wants You to Know -- The Motley Fool

We think it's a win-win contract. It is in our outlook for not just this year but our strategic outlook [...] where we [...] are expecting to continue to grow our earnings, our cash flows, and our returns. -- FedEx CFO Alan Graf

and from same article: "After the earnings report was released, FedEx's top executives spent an hour talking to analysts and investors to provide more details about the company's results. Here are five important points the management team emphasized."

and from the same article: "While this was a fairly generous contract offer -- and FedEx's pilots were already near the top of the industry in pay -- FedEx's management stated that it won't impact the company's projected profit growth trajectory. Other productivity-enhancing initiatives will more than offset the pilots' higher pay."

Last, from How We Overcame Cultural Inertia and Saved Millions

Shows how FedEx pilots saved the company:

"the processes and procedures we needed to make LTAET a safe, efficient, effective part of our operation. And thanks to our crewmembers’ buy-in, we can attribute almost $38,000,000 of our cumulative fuel savings to the regular use of these procedures."

and "Issuance of a Domestic/Flag certificate has given us the opportunity to reduce the amount of fuel carried on our aircraft on good weather days. We can attribute almost $75,000,000 of our cumulative fuel savings to this initiative." for us flying with less fuel and less alternates now.

and "(APU Runtime Reduction) ... this program has resulted in almost $227,000,000 of our cumulative fuel savings."

We pay for our "costs" in this contract fairly closely; do you really think our pay raise hasn't been accounted for--and mostly via savings from within the TA? Remember the hidden $800 million from BC in the 2006 contract. Has anyone seen a penny of that or actually received payment from Grid Penalty Events?!! Just like other posters have said, I bet a lot of that red and blue ink in this TA is just waiting for an unanticipated change or interpretation by the company that will make this TA as cost-neutral as possible.

We have earned increases, not merely cost-neutral tradeoffs in the TA. That's why I question whether or not giving back First Class DHs, HILO, and many other things "pays" for rolling deviation banks? Why do we accept that line of reasoning? Don't you think human nature will "pay" for the rolling deviation bank by people starting to save money where they spent to the max each month before so they didn't return any money? I know I took pride in using all but $15 of $8500 in bank! I bet the rolling deviation bank is nearly cost neutral or cost beneficial to the company as they save 50% each month, and they are just laughing at how we've been out-maneuvered once again.

Read much of the blue and red as giveaways that will likely be exploited. Here's just one example where you have to think like the company to see how they're far ahead of us. How are they going to save by giving us the hotel bank up to $10,000? We will be getting $35/$65 for domestic/international hotel cancellation, and this section of the TA will be cost positive for the company and will likely result in a significant degradation to our hotel quality. How do you think the company is going to use this? Where now, the company books, let's say a dozen rooms a night the entire year at Marriott X in city Z and the Marriott X is willing to suck up our onerous requirements for the rooms, the company will start cancelling rooms 24 hours in advance. Do you think the Marriott X, when it barely wants our business to begin with, and only takes it because we are a stable source of income year round, will want to take 3 cancellations tomorrow, 2 the following night, 6 the night after, etc, etc? Only a desperate hotel would agree to that and do we want to stay at a desperate hotel? We will be seeing a further degradation to our hotel quality and seeing FCIF after FCIF saying how this hotel or that one no longer wants our business. I can see the new FCIFs now: "Please tell us how you like the Super 8 as we are considering it as our new contract hotel in City Z"!

We have leverage; we will still have leverage next peak. The company can't hire its way out of this in just a year under our current CBA. We are just a cost center to FedEx, and they will give us the contract we've earned when the cost of delaying a TA with us increases. Why does anyone think they came to the table and plopped this TA down which we see today? The Ford CEO knows why and you should too.

 

As I gaze out of my lofty tower window I can see the peasants gathering below, pitchforks and torches in hand...

I see where I went wrong:

"A-New hires. Not my problem."

What I was meant to say was that pilot hiring is not my problem. The company decides when, how many and who to hire, not the union. I'm totally in favor of increasing new hire pay, uniform allowance, FDA provisions, retirement benefits/options, etc.

A few (not me) have posted that we should have put new hires on a beefed up B plan so that the A plan could be enhanced for those already here.

My original comment (poorly written) was a response to the Block 6 rep's questioning what the new T/A would mean for pilot hiring, down-bidding and furlough. With over 1,100 pilots turning 65 between now and 2021 I hardly see that as a problem. Likewise raising the possibility of furlough. Does anyone here really believe (other than TC) that those are serious/relevant issues as regards this T/A? If so, I'd enjoy hearing a cogent argument.

OK, you can light those fires now...

 

[QUOTE=screamin jet;1982086]This author's account seems very genuine, articulate, passionate and representative of how the hard negotiating process has been playing out. I think our negotiating committee has been authentically representing our entire pilot group to the best that they can.

Well said. Thanks for posting why a Yes vote and your reasons. Not too many guys here for the TA, but that doesn't mean there aren't a lot of guys voting Yes. Everyone has their reasons for their vote. Hopefully, no matter how guys vote, they have looked at the TA and made an informed decision.

 

Anyone who has read about our proposed A plan and doesn't see improvements isn't paying.Attention. The ability that it be portable to the money manager/portfolio director of your choice is a
HUGE improvement. Instead of the mediocre 4-6 percent one has been achieving year in year out, I will be using my families firm that consistently turns 10-14% year on average.