Let's See What FedEX TA Turn Out
 

MESA PILOTS REJECT TENTATIVE AGREEMENT
On Friday, October 2, ALPA's Election and Ballot Certification Board released the final results of the vote on the Mesa Airlines tentative agreement. With nearly 80 percent of the eligible pilots participating in the ballot, 86 percent voted against the agreement.

"It's clear that this agreement did not meet the goals and expectations of the vast majority of this pilot group," said Capt. Brian Richardson, Mesa MEC chairman. "No matter the results, we are extremely pleased with the number of pilots who came to road shows, asked questions, and fully participated in every part of this process. We will now work to bring the pilots an agreement that fully recognizes our contributions to this airline."
AIR WISCONSIN TENTATIVE AGREEMENT FAILS PILOT RATIFICATION
Air Wisconsin pilots have rejected a proposed tentative agreement reached in August. With 85 percent of the pilot group casting ballots, the TA failed with 67 percent voting against ratification. The ARW pilots had been in negotiations for more than five years and are working under a contract ratified in 2003.
Nearly 800 Air Wisconsin pilots fly under the US Airways Express banner, operating from bases at Washington; New York; Philadelphia; and Norfolk, Va. The proposed TA would have extended existing pay raises and allowed the union to open negotiations on a new contract in May 2017.
MESA AIRLINES CONTINUES GROWTH WITH THE ADDITION OF 15 AIRCRAFT
Yesterday, Mesa Airlines announced that it would receive 15 E175s from United Airlines to operate express routes. The additional aircraft will also increase the number of pilots needed at the airline. Mesa announced it will hire 150 first officers and upgrade 75 captains to staff the new planes.
"While we're excited to welcome new pilots and congratulate new captains at Mesa Airlines, we're also confident that this will result in productive negotiations with company," said Capt. Brian Richardson, Mesa MEC chairman. "Mesa pilots are proud to be part of a growing airline with long-term capacity agreements. However, we are a contributing factor to that growth and stability. We deserve—and require—a contract that rewards the part played by every Mesa pilot."

Looks like other pilot groups are voting down TAs that don't meet their goals--without making the unknown path forward an overriding factor.

It's a great sign that regardless of company, men and women of conviction and character are UNWILLING to accept a contract TA that does not reflect their worth or value to the company.

I'm truly surprised when I hear an intelligent, grown man/woman buying into the "it's probably the best we can get" argument.

No fight in them at all. Just lay down and take whatever FDX gives you. Maybe instead of lanyards and ties, they should wear white flags of surrender as ascots.

I'll pass on that and wear my FITI bracelet and no lanyard. I'll wear my pin but that's it. Lanyards and billboards don't get a deal. Quiet, silent perseverance is what matters. Fly the book. Your choice.

Our CEO interviewed by the Wall Street Journal:

The worst thing about things that fly is that they hit the ground in an uncontrolled manner.’
—Fred Smith, FedEx Corp.

Really? Maybe an analysis of our worldwide operations that generate $125 million PER DAY MINIMUM should have an impact on our CEOs impression of daily revenues.

You must be kidding me. This is an absolute executive slap in the face. We are the highest revenue per pilot force in the entire industry worldwide. Period. End of story.

Talk about a disconnect from reality. Once again with all due respect, FS is a pioneer in this industry and it's undisputed. However, this commentary is insulting and an indicator of our corporate value and perceived worth at the executive level.

Personally, I just flew the most challenging approach to absolute minimums ... International, Cat 2 manual landing. I've been trained by fantastic instructors and I can guarantee the landing was performed in an exemplary, controllable manner.

I'm not qualified to lead a corporation the size of FedEx but I can damn well guarantee you I'm qualified to land anywhere in the world in a controllable manner. I also generate a ridiculous per flight amount of revenue. I will not apologize for nor accept anything less than a proper level of compensation and benefits for which I'm dispatched to perform my duties and skills as an international wide body Captain. I have my role and FS has his. The chain of command is clear and unquestioned from my end. But, do not marginalize my skill or contribution to this company.

And since you posted the same thing on three different forums, I'll answer for the third time.

The quote was about drones. Drones. Use it in context.

Read my reply and you might contemplate your personal worth.

I accept that in context.

Either way, FS had the opportunity to express his appreciation and acknowledgement of the 4200+ professional pilots on this property that get the job done everyday of the calendar year across the globe. He did not express that sentiment. Wouldn't have cost him a nickel, but it was right in front of him. Didn't happen. What does that tell you? He could have said he is proud of the entire workforce and the pilots specifically for their efforts across the planet. That would have probably purchased some in house cooperation and pride. Again, it didn't happen. It speaks volumes my friend. Wake up to the reality of the current dynamic.

Drones notwithstanding, you can be a FDX apologist or get in the game for the only team you have brother. I make no apologies nor am I concerned about a drone. Maybe the delivery personnel should be concerned. Not me.

Oh no, do I have to answer this on all three threads?

Fred can thank his wife, God, and his dentist. All I need is a paycheck and a good contract, I'll pass on the thanks, they don't pay the bills.

Perfect.
You're getting closer to reality.

Finally! We agree on something.;)

GetRealDude, you do realize he was talking about drones right? And why he doesn't see them moving into our industry in the near future? Tell me you read more than the one sentence you posted.

With regard to your first post on this thread...you boast about your character and conviction, and explain that you are going to wear a "FITI bracelet" (whatever that is) and "no lanyard" to prove it. Seriously?!? You'd be better off following your other listed strategy of demonstrating "silent, quiet perseverance".
There are valid reasons for voting yes and valid reasons for voting no on this TA. Courage has zero to do with any of them. At least not the kind of courage many of your flying brothers have spent decades actually demonstrating. I'll speak for myself here, but I know many others agree...FedEx is not my life. Flying for FedEx is my j.o.b. There will never...ever...be a contract that dictates my true value or worth. There will never...ever...be a contract that does nothing more than explain how, when and what I get paid for doing my j.o.b. When I decide FedEx doesn't sufficiently appreciate my services, I will find a new job. Until then, I will do my job. By airline standards, it is absolutely one of the best. I don't need FedEx or my MEC to tell me that. I've lived a long enough life and had enough jobs to judge for myself. I actually wish I'd lived such a pampared life that I thought our pay and working environment were "gut punches". Then again...maybe I don't.

I don't boast whatsoever Rock. Did your "Contract Now" lanyard generate a contract worthy of your contribution? I don't see it. The FITI bracelet is a quiet, firm statement of FIX IT, or TRASH IT. Some see it as F--k It, Truck It. A direct response to the previous Red Letter campaign.

We've all earned a greater slice of the pie. This TA does not reflect our contribution to corporate success. No need to over analyze.

We're under-appreciated and under-compensated for our efforts. Period.

The NC failed to secure a contract reflective of the statement above. You can pick small morsels to criticize me, but the greater message is clear.

You know it and so do I.


Don't get it twisted. Do your job, make your vote, take your check. Quit and move on if you must. Your call.

But don't insinuate that I'm uninformed, making comments out of context (clarification provided already), or should apologize for my position.

I made no mention of courage. There is not a single element of any part of this contract requiring courage. Nothing we do in our job description requires courage. Courage is reserved for warriors fighting the good fight for our freedom. Don't even go there with regard to this or any other thread regarding civilian airline jobs.

I suggest you learn the difference between courage and conviction.

Your position in your first post is that people who vote yes on this TA are cowards. So I'm not going to insinuate you should apologize for that. I am telling you that you are wrong. While sporting a FITI bracelet may be a real Teddy Roosevelt moment in your life, I think the value you put in that decision further underscores your misconceptions about courage. I get that you feel personally assualted and insulted by the TA. You seem to have a real need to have the company tell you how important you are. If that's driving your desire to vote no, so be it. But don't characterize people who disagree with you as surrendering. They may simply require less from the company to have happy lives.

Incorrect on all accounts.
Believe what you want.

I'm not interested in a textual battle with you. You want to argue ... fine. Look in the mirror and go for it.

With all due consideration,
Real courage is indicating you're voting yes on this TA for _____ reason (s)

You may see it as courageous. I see it as simply pragmatic. I voted yes for reasons obvious enough to me. I ran a personal cost/benefit analysis and came to a "yes", by a small margin.

And, with the tenor in communication, I think you were courageous to outline your rationale for voting Yes

Goodness knows it seems as if Albies gone from deified to vilified

That same logic could be used for justifying many things like flying draft, AVA, etc.

I ran another analysis and found out this doesn't advance our profession, is mostly self-funded with productivity gains, is a win for the company and erodes our QOL on many levels. This is my last contract. I could take the money and run but that isn't the legacy I want to leave.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Machz990

It's great to see this overall perspective. We need more of this across the board. We're all responsible for advancing our position and leaving it better for those who follow.

TA1 isn't reflective of either.

Just curious, what did you plug in the spreadsheet for the diminished value of your Defined Benefit Plan?

Also, did you leave the cost of 2017 health care as a blank (a flat percentage of "something"), an amount to be determined later, or did you use somebody's guess?







.

So I'm guessing unity goes down the drain when comes to voting. It's all about ME. Just like on another thread I read Albie15 pages for voting yes and again it's was all about how it benefits him and his family. Therefore the pilots who fly overtime were doing so justifiably.

Again I have no dog in this fight but just observing the double standards.

Completely agree.

If it's convenient for Albie, two's in. The pedestal he's been placed on continues to baffle me. I guess being a block rep entitles you to a captive audience looking for wisdom and truth.

The TA is a dog. Not a single pilot on this property is impressed and doing backflips in the living room with excitement.

But ... plenty are willing to rationalize the safety of marginal gains. I'm happy for Albie and his family, enjoy HKG. It should be a significantly better experience, but then again, some people like to rough it versus going first class.

Any of you no guys agree with this sentiment... While we cast our collective votes, we are each voting for the enhancement our own lives and careers.

Star clipper aparently doesn't even work here and you are supposed to vote his interests.

It doesn't matter where I work, but I'll call BS or double standard when I see it. A lot of guys on here who were preaching unity and knock other for flying overtime "whether or it was to the individuals family benefit" are now only concerned about there own family and pockets. Therefore when time to negotiate another contract how would be able to deter guy from flying overtime. Seems like it's ok to be selfish and put unity aside when it's convenient to you.

I appreciate the people who explained how the TA would affect them on a personal level. Everyone is thinking about that, and personal examples make much more sense than wading through technical contractual language. I don't consider that selfish at all. In fact the concept of, "Don't vote your interests, vote mine, and if you don't, you're selfish," seems weird to me.

The reason why I think there may be little unity is witnessing all the newly blocked schedules over the last several months, and the number of people working three weeks out of every four, during negotiations. It's hard to keep the faith, witnessing that.:(

It actually does matter where you work. You want a no vote because you think it will give your union a stronger hand. Nothing wrong with that, it is in your self interest.

Unity while we are in negotiations is one thing. Unity after we vote on a contract is another issue. Every vote is based one way or the other on self interests. But once we as a group decide on a course of action then it takes all of us to achieve it. And that is what we as indiviiduals are deciding, which step are we going to take next. It is in your self interest to join a union and it is in your self interest to see that the union is successful.

I guess these people are looking out for their best interest and the best interest of their families. It's no different than FDXLAG, ROCK and Albie15 defending their votes

We decided a course of action - it was called our openers! We didn't acheive them! The course of action required would be to turn down this TA and work for a better one!

Based on what I'm reading, there is no contract yet. Just a TA, the contract haven't been voted in yet. And if you think Mngmt don't look at what actions are taken by crew force at other companies, you're fooling yourself. They pay very close attention to work rules, compensation ect. With that being said, work rules and QOL and other companies could have an adverse effect on your company. There is currently a new company flying MD11 based out of Florida, if their work rule are such that they don't have enough rest and God forbid an incident occur, what effect would the incident of an MD11 have on your company. At the end of the day we are all interconnected. One man mistake regardless if it's due to fatigue or poor working condition could cause serious change in regulation for all.

You are assuming, however, what is the "right" way to vote. What, in your mind, is a no voter doing differently than a yes voter? Why do you single those people out?

Do you think the yes voter is being selfish, and the no voter is valiantly advancing the cause, against their own self interest?

Edit to add, maybe you should join in the Lord of the Rings proposed TA story.

It's as simple as that. How this crewforce even considers anything less is troubling.

So you going to withhold dues if it a yes? What are your actions if it is a no? Maybe dissolve ALPA? I am sorry you are so upset, life goes on. If the nos carry the day, part of me will be relieved that the company doesn't get 8 in 24 relief and we can have a real discussion on retirement.

Thanks for the update.

The no faction is starting to sound shrill. I've been reading all this the last few days and it occurred to me; why would the MEC vote unanimously to conclude negotiations and then immediately a very coordinated effort by 4 reps whipsaw and vociferously attack the TA before the road shows even started? I did some looking, and Capt. Teeter published an interesting opinion back in March about the ongoing struggle of a minority to gain control of FDX ALPA. Could it be all this caterwauling is more about the "inevitable reorg." and control Of the MEC than about the TA? :confused::confused:

Apparently you have no idea of how many MD11's we have crashed.
Forget even talking about incidents.:(

I pointed Albie15 out because he did a complete 180 from his pre TA post. He listed had a lot of things which he stated were no votes then he post a few pages on why he is voting yes even if most of the demands weren't met. As for Rock and FDXLAG it just seems like they have no rational. Pretty much if the union say it, they believe it, regardless of what's written in black and white

Great, so Starclipper works for someone else. Policywonk is a weird man of mystery. And not a single FedEx no voter will answer the very easy question I posted on this thread. Not that we actually know if there are any FedEx no voters on this thread.
What a circus. No wonder 90% of the crew force considers this website something below the Gerry Springer show.

It's funny. There are a couple of posters on our other site that post a lot like Lag and Rock.

Albie is a very thoughtful poster. Many of us were very interested to hear what he had to say. Even though he knew with this crowd, he would get attacked if he said he supported the yes vote, he still posted honestly. I don't think you have read any of Rock and Fdxlag's rationale, that they have posted repetitively. So it sounds like you are making your conclusions based upon what some very vocal people have written. Have you analyzed the TA?