Rock

Fellow FedEx Pilots,

As voting for the TA continues, we want to send a collective opinion to our respective Councils. We, the “yes voters,” want to be clear: We voted to send the TA to our membership because we believe that it is worthy of ratification. Had we thought that you should vote it down, we would have been “no voters.” Had we thought that any meaningful improvements could have been achieved within any reasonable timeframe, we would have been “no voters.” Had we thought that turning this down would produce leverage required to make more improvements, we would have been “no voters.” Had we thought that risking the achieved gains by turning down this offer, and then returning to the table with the company was a good risk, we would have been “no voters.”

While no TA is perfect, and you won’t find anyone who doesn’t want more in every section, this TA represents significant monetary and quality of life improvements across the spectrum of seniority, longevity, and age. It is industry leading, in most cases by leaps and bounds, and secures improvements in every section of our CBA.

There are numerous documents, videos, charts, and opinions posted on the FedEx ALPA website. After reviewing that information and getting your questions answered, we hope that your decision will be to join us in our yes vote. Either way, we respect your decision and look forward to continuing our careers together, fighting side by side for our contract.

Voting can be done, or redone, on the TA website by clicking the green Ballot Open graphic. Login is required.

Respectfully,


Captain Jim Mumby
Block 2


Captain Derek Martin
Block 3


Captain Kit Teeter
Block 4


Captain Jamie Morton
Block 5


F/O Fred Galey
Block 7


F/O Steve Donovan
Block 8


Captain Andrew Coward
Block 10 (HKG)


F/O Tony Miller
Block 12 (LAX)


Captain Cheryl Konter
Block 13 (CGN)


Captain John Walsh
Block 14 (IND)

Rock

I included their names because their identities and their positions are public knowledge. Their email is already published on a website that is open to the general public.
I don't know any of them personally. Does anyone on this website want to tell them they should actually read the TA and then they'll change their vote? That they are just SCARED, and are voting out of FEAR? They are providing the same reasons for voting yes that many of the yes voters on this website have been ridiculed for. They represent 71% of voting members of the MEC. They don't insist you agree with them, but how many people on this website are ready to claim that these guys are only voting yes because they are uninformed?

iarapilot

Dang Rock. You just made the best argument, again, for voting yes. I will be changing my vote....

supercruiser

I'm pretty sure each of those elected MEC reps has an in-depth understanding of each section of the TA, as well as the total value to our group. I'm going with those MEC reps that represent 71%...

CloudSailor

I only know one of those reps personally. I am certain they are not uninformed. I hope they are not liars. But I have no way of knowing if they are scared, and how much the fear of the unknown against the very successful corporation (financially, in negotiations, and in arbitrations), is affecting their decision making.

Their individual comms seemed to be along the lines of the other thread by Jakal: voting yes, begrudgingly. Knowing we deserve more, but willing to settle for a TA that does not meet our so called 'cornerstone' Section 6 Openers. Knowing we set out to win the game, but settling to move the ball downfield. Plain and simple.

So what happens next round of negotiations? You know, when the company goes for PBS across the entire bid pack? And when they go for the A-plan in its entirety (of course, with a whopping 2% added to B-plan)? And they go after more QOL measures to gain efficiency? What is our collective word worth anyway? What will our openers be worth? Our supposed lines in the sand?

This TA sets the tone for the rest of our careers here. Most important for those with 10+ years remaining.

CloudSailor

I should add that I have nothing but full respect for a well-informed voter. That sometimes gets lost in this forum.

Respect not for someone who just goes with the 71%, or votes yes because the NC encouraged us to (completely unethical BTW, as it is a conflict of interest to push their own product like that), or because the roadshow was a solid display of the gains in the TA. But respect for those yes voters who have read the TA, section by section, and think we achieved what we had set out to achieve. I disagree completely with them, but respect them, and would not call them scared liars.

However, I flew with a guy not too long ago, who had not read a single line of the TA, and was basing his entire decision on a roadshow. To me, that is a lack of critical thinking applied to a decision that will affect the next 6-10 years of our working lives. There are many who are voting like that. I do lack respect for that attitude.

Laughing_Jakal

Cloud, I get that.....I know why I really...really want to pull a no lever, and why I will probably pull the yes lever. Part of my calculus is that this "game" is never over. We will never "win" the game, there is no post game show, no trophy, no MVP. This game keeps gong long after you or I are on the bench. The best we can do is keep time of possession and score some points so that we are in the lead when we get benched. Just as in politics, there is never a crowning blow that defeats your political foe....if they are determined never to capitulate, this game is neither won or lost.....

CloudSailor

I get that analogy too man. That has also been part of my decision-making process, even though it might not seem that way from my opinionated, one-sided posts here.

And I have always appreciated the insight you present on this forum over the years. You've read the TA, digested it, and are making the best decision you think is right for you and for the rest of us. I fully respect that.

Laughing_Jakal

And I yours. Thanks for the kind words. Whatever happens, we need to stand shoulder to shoulder. We also need to create a more aggressive culture and fight like hell to defend contract wording whatever book we live under.

CloudSailor

Agreed man. Completely.