fdx retro bonus package
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2007
Position: let it snow, let it snow, let it snow
Posts: 828
#6
Hello ALPA?
What are the implications of that (assuming the rumor is true)? Does that mean everybody's checks will be delayed? Until when?
The Court System in some parts of the country are VERY backed up. I had a recent minor traffic violation dismissed because it took nearly 2 years to go to court (Right to a speedy trail)!
And ... if all of this is true, why hasn't the union mentioned it? Could we all be assessed damages? Why / when / how much? Enquiring minds want to know,
#8
Hope its not a non-member
So in reality, he/she is suing all of us.
Is it the Companies decision or Alpa's about not paying "Active" pilots the bonus. In reality if it represents a "retro" then if they weren't active, they wouldn't have "earned" the retro.....as LTD is based on work history prior to going on LTD, any active months that they work after LTD would earn the retro.
That is just a short look at it.
I sure hope it's not a "Non-Member not on dues checkoff" that is suing us (if sit rumor is true). That would be some pretty distasteful icing on the cake. Somehow I could stomach it better if it is a dues paying member suing us.
Is it the Companies decision or Alpa's about not paying "Active" pilots the bonus. In reality if it represents a "retro" then if they weren't active, they wouldn't have "earned" the retro.....as LTD is based on work history prior to going on LTD, any active months that they work after LTD would earn the retro.
That is just a short look at it.
I sure hope it's not a "Non-Member not on dues checkoff" that is suing us (if sit rumor is true). That would be some pretty distasteful icing on the cake. Somehow I could stomach it better if it is a dues paying member suing us.
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: Crewmember
Posts: 1,376
It's not retro, unless you call it retro. It comes no where close to the amount needed for it to be retro.
It is a signing bonus, plain and simple.
You can't have it both ways.
Oh, and the date should be date of signing. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a lawsuit over that as well.
It is a signing bonus, plain and simple.
You can't have it both ways.
Oh, and the date should be date of signing. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a lawsuit over that as well.
#10
ALPA's Executive Council (the EVPs) will render a decision.
A subcommittee of the MEC Reps decided who would be included, and they tried to be as inclusive as possible. They included pilots who had already retired. They included pilots on military leave (had to by law). They included management pilots. According to the ALPA National attorneys who assisted, they supposedly had the most inclusive policy of anyone making similar lump-sum distributions.
More complicated still is the effect some payments made to the pilot might affect the LTD amounts to which he is entitled. Would receipt of a retro signing bonus decrease the amount of LTD benefits he would therefore receive? I don't know, but I acknowledge it's not a simple calculation.
Dear Fellow FedEx Express Pilot:
Enclosed is a packet of materials regarding the retro signing bonus payments ...
Looks like they call it retro. Yeah, I agree the amount comes nowhere close, but shouldn't the amounts then be proportional?Enclosed is a packet of materials regarding the retro signing bonus payments ...
Since it's retro, and it should therefore address and seek to compensate those pilots who were harmed by delayed pay raises, consider the case of a pilot who was a narrow-body Captain for the entire 32 months compared to a pilot who was a narrow-body First Officer for 31 months, and who then upgraded to narrow-body Captain during the 32nd month. Were they harmed equally? I would submit that the Former was harmed more, and should receive a larger portion of the retro signing bonus, and the latter should receive a prorated portion of the retro bonus based on his narrow-body First Officer position for 31 of 32 months, and a prorated portion of the retro bonus based on his narrow-body Captain position for 1 of 32 months.
Since it is far more common for pilots to upgrade than to downgrade, particularly during the period of time in question here, the recalculation of the retro bonus to account for upgrading would likely result in reduced amounts for anyone who upgraded, and increased amounts for everyone who did not.
Discuss.
.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post