![]() |
Originally Posted by jungle
(Post 1106155)
My suggestion is to replace all of them with a troop of baboons. The baboons would be cheaper to keep, less destructive, honest, more intelligent, cleaner and far more amusing.
They might even make CSPAN fun to watch.:D |
Originally Posted by fdx727pilot
(Post 1106218)
While a nice number, it contrasts with this
FDX: Key Metrics and Competitive Analysis for FedEx - Wikinvest which gives us $1.75 B for the whole year, and for the whole corporation vs Fedex Express. I have trouble believing the money the tech geeks and truck drivers earn us has anything to do with the cost of safely operating jets. Fedex can still afford to operate under the new rules, but I don't think your numbers reflect the reality of our situation. As far as operating under part 117, I agree. Now we have a target for scheduling improvements in the CBA |
Originally Posted by Spur
(Post 1106225)
He is misinterpreting "Gross Profit". Google it. For FedEx it is essentially gross revenue. You have to subtract operating expenses, taxes, and interest to get net income, which is what most of us think of when we hear "profit."
As far as operating under part 117, I agree. Now we have a target for scheduling improvements in the CBA |
Originally Posted by UPSFO4LIFE
(Post 1106208)
Curious as to how you don't understand the Final ruling came from the Executive Branch of Government????? It's really not hard to comprehend. They had the final say, not congress, not the senate, and not the Supreme Court.
The POTUS appoints the head of each cabinent member (department), but I find it unlikely that the WH staff can micromanage the minitua inside of every single rulemaking event, in every single department, unless it is extremely politically charged, with outcome that can effect the majority electorate. (i.e. the morning after pill where HHS overuled the FDA- big politically charged decision) In this case the rulemaking inititiative had some congressional and political impetus, but unfortunately "we cargo guys" don't matter in the bigger picture of $$ & politics. From History -the WH appoints cabinent members that align to its vision and goals, but as pointed out by others- there will never be an encompassing saviour- more of a general policy direction. I'm disgusted by the outcome, but I applaud them for partially addressing the issue and finally making a decision for the majority of commercial pilots. |
Originally Posted by fdx727pilot
(Post 1106218)
While a nice number, it contrasts with this
FDX: Key Metrics and Competitive Analysis for FedEx - Wikinvest which gives us $1.75 B for the whole year, and for the whole corporation vs Fedex Express. I have trouble believing the money the tech geeks and truck drivers earn us has anything to do with the cost of safely operating jets. Fedex can still afford to operate under the new rules, but I don't think your numbers reflect the reality of our situation. |
It's nice to see the UPS union showing some leadership on this issue. Thanks UPS guys/girls ...
UPS Pilots Union to Sue FAA Over Exemption From Rest Rules - Bloomberg |
We (FDX) just moved one more notch closer to a return to 4A2B.
|
Originally Posted by olly
(Post 1106333)
...The POTUS appoints the head of each cabinent member (department), but I find it unlikely that the WH staff can micromanage the minitua inside of every single rulemaking event, in every single department, unless it is extremely politically charged, with outcome that can effect the majority electorate.
You seem to realize that the head of the FAA is a political appointee of the president, as is his boss, the Secretary of Transportation. Do you also realize that the OMB is full of political appointees who work directly for the president, and who are essentially an extension of the WH staff? When the "final" NPRM left the FAA headed up the chain, it didn't have a cargo cutout. Didn't have one when it reached the OMB. When it came back down, after much industrial lobbying of the president and the NMB, it DID have a cargo cutout. You're suggesting that this change was the idea of the most junior appointee in the process, presumably after everyone above him had approved something else? Everyone else realizes otherwise. See: Why New Pilot Fatigue Rules Took a Rest Stop at OMB - Washington Wire - WSJ |
Originally Posted by MaydayMark
(Post 1106344)
It's nice to see the UPS union showing some leadership on this issue. Thanks UPS guys/girls ...
UPS Pilots Union to Sue FAA Over Exemption From Rest Rules - Bloomberg |
Originally Posted by ThePurpleScrew
(Post 1106418)
Thank you, UPS.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:59 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands